Briefs Challenging Appellees’ Standing
To help court-watchers sort through more than one thousand pages of amicus briefs in Gill v. Whitford, the Brennan Center has prepared an annotated guide breaking down each brief's most important arguments.
Summary: This brief, filed by the Republican National Committee, argues, among other things, that the Appellees lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s electoral map on a state-wide basis. The RNC also asserts that the Supreme Court should define any partisan-gerrymandering case of action narrowly to avoid undue congressional interference with state elections. The RNC and Michael T. Morley are co-counsel for this brief.
Summary: This brief, filed by the Southeastern Legal Foundation, argues that Appellees’ state-wide challenge to Wisconsin’ map represents a generalized claim of injury, rather than an individualized injury, and thus Appellees lack standing to bring their partisan-gerrymandering claims. The Southeastern Legal Foundation and the law firm Strickland Brockington Lewis are co-counsel for this brief.