Skip Navigation
Press Release

Ohio Voters Ask State Supreme Court to Begin Contempt Proceedings Against Ohio Redistricting Commission

The commission tweaked previously invalidated maps Monday night, rejecting in the 11th hour legislative plans prepared by independent map drawers

March 29, 2022
Contact: Romario R. Ricketts, Media Contact, rickettsr@brennan.law.nyu.edu, 646-925-8734

Yester­day, peti­tion­ers in Ohio Organ­iz­ing Collab­or­at­ive v. Ohio Redis­trict­ing Commis­sion joined a motion filed by peti­tion­ers Bria Bennett et al. with the Ohio Supreme Court, asking the court to require the commis­sion to explain why it has not complied with the court’s orders to adopt maps that do not viol­ate the state consti­tu­tion’s prohib­i­tion on partisan gerry­man­der­ing. The motion urges the court to start contempt proceed­ings against the commis­sion and stay the imple­ment­a­tion of the maps the commis­sion adop­ted on Monday night. The commis­sion had aban­doned maps drawn by inde­pend­ent map-draw­ers in favor of a slightly tweaked version of a plan that the court had previ­ously inval­id­ated as uncon­sti­tu­tional.

The Bren­nan Center for Justice at NYU Law and Reed Smith repres­ent peti­tion­ers Ohio Organ­iz­ing Collab­or­at­ive, CAIR-Ohio, Ohio Envir­on­mental Coun­cil, Ahmad Aboukar, Crys­tal Bryant, Samuel Gresham Jr., Pren­tiss Haney, Mikayla Lee, and Pier­rette “Petee” Talley.

Alicia Bannon, director of the Judi­ciary Program at the Bren­nan Center for Justice, had the follow­ing comment: 

“The Ohio Redis­trict­ing Commis­sion contin­ues to openly defy the Ohio Supreme Court, and it must be held account­able. Ohio’s consti­tu­tion bans partisan gerry­man­der­ing because an over­whelm­ing major­ity of Ohioans voted to add that prohib­i­tion. The people of Ohio deserve legis­lat­ive districts whose bound­ar­ies are fair, not maps rigged for one party’s bene­fit.”

Patrick Yingling, part­ner at Reed Smith, had the follow­ing comment: 

“Again, the Ohio Supreme Court issued clear orders that the commis­sion failed to follow. The commis­sion owes the court an explan­a­tion and the people of Ohio fair maps.”

The motion, the court’s order, and more filings and back­ground on Ohio Organ­iz­ing Collab­or­at­ive v. Ohio Redis­trict­ing Commis­sion are avail­able here.

Resources