Republican leaders in Maryland have turned to a national law firm with a track record in redistricting battles to contest a recently approved amendment to the state constitution. The lawsuit, filed in Dorchester County on August 10, seeks to halt the amendment that would limit the application of compactness and contiguity requirements to state legislative districts only, leaving congressional maps without clear constitutional standards.
Who is filing the suit
The plaintiffs include State Senator Chris West (R‑Baltimore and Carroll), Senator Mary Beth Carozza (R‑Lower Shore), Delegate Chris Adams, Senator Johnny Mautz (R‑Middle Shore), and Dorchester County Republican Central Committee member Lindsay Wheatley. West, an attorney, said the case was filed in Dorchester because the plaintiffs wanted a judge they believed would give the case a fair hearing, especially since the Eastern Shore is heavily impacted by the 1st Congressional District.
Legal arguments
Republicans argue the amendment “undercuts key portions of the Maryland Declaration of Rights” and would strip away criteria that courts could use to evaluate congressional maps. West warned that without a legal standard, courts would have “no choice but to dismiss any such challenges,” allowing the Democratic‑controlled legislature to draw districts without meaningful oversight.
The amendment, passed by voters earlier this month, clarifies that compactness and contiguity requirements apply only to state legislative districts. Critics say the change removes a safeguard that has historically limited partisan gerrymandering in congressional races.
Connection to national redistricting fights
The law firm representing the Maryland plaintiffs, BakerHostetler, previously advised Louisiana lawmakers on a redistricting plan that ultimately led to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana v. Callais decision, which struck down the Voting Rights Act’s race‑based districting provisions. The firm’s involvement underscores the growing trend of out‑of‑state legal expertise influencing state redistricting battles.
State response and procedural moves
An attorney for the Maryland State Election Board has asked that the case be transferred to Annapolis, where a related lawsuit on the same amendment is scheduled for a hearing on August 25. The board hopes to consolidate the cases, but Dorchester County plaintiffs have opposed the move, insisting the Eastern Shore should hear the case locally.
Earlier this year, Senate President Bill Ferguson (D‑Baltimore City) blocked a map that would have increased Democratic control of all eight congressional seats, citing concerns that a new map could invite Republican court challenges. The current amendment, however, would make it harder for courts to intervene in future congressional maps.
Political context
Maryland’s congressional delegation is currently seven Democrats to one Republican. The amendment’s supporters, primarily Democrats, argue the change is needed to modernize the redistricting process, while opponents view it as a partisan effort to cement Democratic dominance.
The Oversight Project, an offshoot of the Heritage Foundation, has also backed earlier lawsuits, warning that a win for the amendment could result in a congressional delegation “filled by open border zealots who will put illegal immigrants before the American people.”
What’s next
The Dorchester County case adds to a series of legal challenges aimed at the amendment. The Maryland State Election Board must certify the ballot language by August 31, and the outcome of these lawsuits could shape how Maryland’s congressional districts are drawn for the next decade.
Original reporting: Alexandria, VA News – WTOP News — read the source article.
