|
|
|
HARRISBURG — In a surprise 4-3 vote, the state Supreme Court decided Pennsylvania’s new legislative districts are “contrary to law” Wednesday, a move likely to dash the hopes of some candidates for November’s General Assembly election.
The decision means Pennsylvania's current district lines — in place since 2001 — will remain intact until the Legislative Reapportionment Commission can rework them to meet the court’s approval.
This is the first time in decades the court has rejected a redistricting plan.
Redistricting — or reapportionment, as it is officially known — is required every 10 years to ensure parity between population and legislative representation, but is most often marked by intense political self-interest by the party in the majority when the new plan comes due.
Specific instructions are not expected out until next week regarding changes the court will require, say court spokespeople. Depending on the complexity of the changes required, it could take weeks or even months for the commission to comply with the order.
“This is uncharted territory,” said Majority Leader, State Sen. Dominic Pileggi in a statement. “And at this point the court has not provided the information needed for the Legislative Reapportionment Commission to fully understand how to proceed.
“As a member of the Commission, I will do everything in my power to ensure that a redistricting plan for the General Assembly is enacted as promptly as possible when the court releases its opinion.”
“We are thankful that the Court and the many petitioners understood the concerns of the voters who took the time and effort to express their concerns to both the Commission and ultimately the Court," said Minority Leader, State Sen. Jay Costa in a statement. "The Pennsylvania Supreme Court acted with respect for the Constitution, communities across our commonwealth, and the voters. We await the state Supreme Court’s direction regarding drafting a new reapportionment plan for the commonwealth.”
With three Democrats and one Republican justice sending the controversial Republican-led plan back to the drawing board, candidates that had begun campaigning for seats in the newly redrawn districts may no longer reside in those districts, which would make them ineligible to run unless the new plans can be drawn up in time for the April 24 primary.
One such candidate is Democrat Phil Scollo, a Dingman Twp. (Pike County) resident who recently announced his intention to run against Republican incumbent Mike Peifer for the 139th House district, but will not be eligible to run in that district if the district lines remain as they have been for the last decade.
“I am pleased that Chief Justice Castille voted with three of his fellow Judges to overturn the redistricting maps,” said Mark Graziadio, Chairman of the Wayne County Democratic Committee,
“The final maps were far more partisan than originally imagined. We knew (the Republicans) would use their control of the process to draw a map benefiting themselves, but didn't expect it would be that grossly partisan.”
HARRISBURG — In a surprise 4-3 vote, the state Supreme Court decided Pennsylvania’s new legislative districts are “contrary to law” Wednesday, a move likely to dash the hopes of some candidates for November’s General Assembly election.
The decision means Pennsylvania's current district lines — in place since 2001 — will remain intact until the Legislative Reapportionment Commission can rework them to meet the court’s approval.
This is the first time in decades the court has rejected a redistricting plan.
Redistricting — or reapportionment, as it is officially known — is required every 10 years to ensure parity between population and legislative representation, but is most often marked by intense political self-interest by the party in the majority when the new plan comes due.
Specific instructions are not expected out until next week regarding changes the court will require, say court spokespeople. Depending on the complexity of the changes required, it could take weeks or even months for the commission to comply with the order.
“This is uncharted territory,” said Majority Leader, State Sen. Dominic Pileggi in a statement. “And at this point the court has not provided the information needed for the Legislative Reapportionment Commission to fully understand how to proceed.
“As a member of the Commission, I will do everything in my power to ensure that a redistricting plan for the General Assembly is enacted as promptly as possible when the court releases its opinion.”
“We are thankful that the Court and the many petitioners understood the concerns of the voters who took the time and effort to express their concerns to both the Commission and ultimately the Court," said Minority Leader, State Sen. Jay Costa in a statement. "The Pennsylvania Supreme Court acted with respect for the Constitution, communities across our commonwealth, and the voters. We await the state Supreme Court’s direction regarding drafting a new reapportionment plan for the commonwealth.”
With three Democrats and one Republican justice sending the controversial Republican-led plan back to the drawing board, candidates that had begun campaigning for seats in the newly redrawn districts may no longer reside in those districts, which would make them ineligible to run unless the new plans can be drawn up in time for the April 24 primary.
One such candidate is Democrat Phil Scollo, a Dingman Twp. (Pike County) resident who recently announced his intention to run against Republican incumbent Mike Peifer for the 139th House district, but will not be eligible to run in that district if the district lines remain as they have been for the last decade.
“I am pleased that Chief Justice Castille voted with three of his fellow Judges to overturn the redistricting maps,” said Mark Graziadio, Chairman of the Wayne County Democratic Committee,
“The final maps were far more partisan than originally imagined. We knew (the Republicans) would use their control of the process to draw a map benefiting themselves, but didn't expect it would be that grossly partisan.”
