Old lines verses new lines. It is gerrymandered. Experts scored it. I Just looked at it. Start over.
Monday’s trial recaps are here and here. Tuesday’s trial recaps are here and here. Wednesday’s trial recaps are here and here. Day 4 morning details are here.
April 11, Monday afternoon’s closing arguments
Sharon Brett of the ACLU Kansas closed for Wyandotte plaintiffs.
Ad Astra tramples on the rights of Kansans to have their voices heard in Washington DC on critical issues like healthcare and infrastructure. Six experts proved in different mathematical models and methods that Ad Astra targets Democrats and it targets minorities. It drowns out Democrats in northern Johnson. It drowns out minorities in northern Wyandotte. It drowns out voters in Lawrence. The process was not fair and transparent and plaintiffs are just asking the court to call a spade a spade. Courts adjudicate cases like this all the time. No one branch is allowed unchecked or unfettered power.
The Kansas Constitution speaks to broad protections of Kansans voters rights in Section 1 and 2. It is explicit that power inherently belongs to the people and they have equal power to make law. Ad Astra denies that right. By refusing to follow their own defined guidelines designed to protect voter interests, the legislature has shown their intent. Ad Astra violates section 11 guarantees of free speech, as this targets specific groups that associate (Democrats) and attempts to silence them electorally. Article 5 addresses voting and also grants broad protections to citizens.
Susan Wagle spoke for the party when she stated her plans to draw a 4-0 GOP map. While she didn’t finish the race herself, she handed the baton to others in the party that pushed it across the finish line. The fact is we still don’t know who authored this map.
Multiple experts spoke to compactness and COI problems in Ad Astra and the defense has not provided any direct evidence to refute those arguments. Their only defense are the standards are squishy.
This all addresses the partisan gerrymandering aspect but there is the additional claims of minority gerrymandering, which is why there were separate lawsuits filed. Those are additional violations. The defense has conceded that Kansas Constitution protects against voter dilution. The fact that minority Democrats do even worse in Ad Astra than white Democrats speaks to the racial gerrymandering violations. Experts described how Ad Astra makes minorities electorally irrelevant.
Senate President Ty Masterson is on the legislative record stating he wasn’t concerned and disingenuously dismissed issues by claiming minority numbers didn’t change that much. But then he (and other GOP legislators) refused subpoenas and would not address these claims directly with the court. They claimed Kansans asked that Johnson County be kept together, but then voted against Mushroom Rock that would have accomplished that.
The evidence is overwhelming. This is not close call and we ask the court strike down his map.
Second plaintiffs lawyer from Douglas County has a simple request. You heard the experts and seen the math. But now just look at it. Look how it cuts Wyandotte in half. The most diverse but smallest geographic county is cut in half. Look at Lawrence. The city is surgically removed from Douglas county and added to a narrow strip of counties to drown in the Big 1st. The population numbers moved around back up how extreme this is. It is blatant. This trial and decision is an important moment in Kansas history. Treat it as such.
Defense summation is delivered by Tony Rupp.
I’ve been arguing cases in Kansas for forty years and this is my fourth time in this courtroom. I want to thank the court and staff for their hard work during this trial.
Plaintiffs have not met their burden of proof and not defined or met legal standards. That is a fatal flaw in their case.
Even Dr. Chen’s most critical analysis shows CD-3 in Ad Astra has just a slight GOP edge. Barely 50%. It’s competitive. The definition of gerrymandering is drawing districts with the intent of making it unwinnable. Well, CD-3 is winnable and competitive, so this doesn’t meet the definition of a gerrymandered district. Kansas is a 55%+ to 40% GOP state. If the Kansas Legislature wanted a 4-0 GOP map, they would have drawn one to ensure that; not a 3-maybe-1 map.
The evidence submitted includes the Legislative record and debates. The court should decide based on that. Not based on plaintiffs orchestrating an attack on the elected legislature by people that frankly lost.
There was a check and balance. The governor vetoed and the legislature overruled with a proper supermajority vote. The map meets the constitutionally mandated guideline, which is to rebalance population. It did so perfectly with zero deviation. It also groups similar communities of interest. They just weren’t the same ones the plaintiffs would have like used. Keeping Johnson County whole was a core goal. 10 different Chambers of Commerce asked for that. Democrat Stephanie Clayton asked for that.
This was just about numbers and there were no good options. Johnson and Wyandotte could not be kept together and whole. One, if not both, had to be split. Someone would have always been upset at the outcome. That’s not racial or partisan. It’s just legislative judgement.
The judges drew the maps in the last redistricting cycle and that produced 18 GOP congressional victories in 20 races. That wasn’t deemed gerrymandered. This map is similar.
If voters are truly upset by this map or the process, they have a remedy. They can vote out the legislators.
Of course Senator Ethan Corson is upset. He was a Democratic activist before running for the senate. He is a lawyer that has worked on voting rights issues. His reaction and testimony is totally expected.
States don’t delegate map drawing to political science people. It is done by legislators. Guidelines are helpful, but that is the extent of it. They are suggestions. There is no scoring involved to test maps. Don’t replace this legislative work with a judicial decision.
This was not a rushed process. The census was delayed. The legislature did the best they could with the time allotted. What has been rushed is this trial. We haven’t been following the normal rules. I only had about two weeks to prepare and met six experts on the same day I filed my notice to appear.
Back in 2012, the people at Kansas State in Manhattan complained about being placed in the Big 1st and being split from KU. They have adjusted. This cycle reunites the schools and adds Fort Hays State. That’s a good thing.
Dr. Alford testified that the map changes from 2012 to 2022 are modest. They are fair and don’t disenfranchise voters. The chance of winning districts hasn’t changed that much. The legislature didn’t draw incumbents together or out of their districts. Models show that each would win reelection in their new districts based on the 2020 election results.
The legislature did its job. We ask the judge to stay out of the political thicket.
------------------------—
Judge Bill Klapper thanks everyone for their cooperation and the exemplary work over these four days. He hopes visitors watching these proceeding realize how good these legal teams are. He wishes the participants a smooth journey to the Kansas Supreme Court.
Teams have until 5pm Monday April 18 to formally file all documents. Judge Clapper will rule within 5 days of that deadline. The ruling and all evidence submitted here will be appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court.
------------------------—
My thoughts — The legal teams for plaintiffs were extremely impressive. One attorney was dedicated to each witness, so they knew the subject completely and smoothly presented their experts materials. The original testimony was given anticipating potential weaknesses and counter arguments, and they diffused those points before defense counsel had a chance to surprise anyone. Cross examines were meticulously structured to puncture the credibly of opposing witnesses and maintain the testimony given by plaintiffs experts.
Down to the technical team, the plaintiffs were superior. When a document was called, it was up on the screen and the relevant sections were highlighted and magnified with a clear expanded raised pop-up. The defense exhibits were usually a pdf that was magnified using the + button to expand. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s how I read documents. But, in a professional presentation the difference makes an impact. It’s the difference between a “C” and “A” student. One is fine, but the other is excellent.
The crew from Loud Light, a Kansas activist organization involved in voter registration and youth issues, were there to view the trial. They are a named party in other voting litigation issues in Kansas and worked to find the individuals for standing that would be harmed by Ad Astra in these lawsuits. They also produce an excellent weekly video about work at the Kansas Legislature. They are a good follow on twitter.
www.facebook.com/...
Judge Klapper’s temperament was on point. He expected a high level of conduct and the legal teams exceed his expectation. It allowed him to run a less formal courtroom and it ran smoothly.
One item did bother me a bit. The judge used first names to call on attorneys, which in itself is fine. However, there was a little too much familiarity with the defense. There is a difference between addressing someone by their first name, and knowing someone on a first name basis. Many plaintiff attorneys were from around the county and not known to the judge before this lawsuit. The two primary defense lawyers are life long Kansans, educated here and trying cases for decades. They actually know the judge. It comes out in exchanges. Gary, I know what you are tying to do… Tony, why don’t you do this? The occasional suggestions made while conversing during objections sounded almost like the judge was throwing them a lifeline. Again, I saw no evidence of favoritism and most rulings on objections did go against the defense. It was just a perception issue in a few conversations that made me a little uncomfortable.
The submitted legislative record. Subpoenas were issued to GOP members of the senate and redistricting committees. They were ignored. Members of the legislature are not subject to civil lawsuits relating to their duties in government. However, they were not on trial. The map was. Their product was. The named defendants are the SOS and county election officials, which would have enforce the maps.
I will draw inference from the GOP legislators refusal to testify. If this was simple legislative judgement as the defense contends, the GOP leadership should have proudly shown up to explain it. By not showing up, they are hiding. We still don’t know who drew this map or who influenced it.
I think the evidence is overwhelming and well presented. They were able to articulate in historical terms and prove in stats and models what we all can see in this map.
I have always been uncertain to the law that would address this issue. It has not been tried in state court before. I do take comfort that the Kansas Supreme Court has protected a woman's right to choose in Kansas through interpretation of individual rights granted. They have overruled many anti-abortion laws produced by the legislature. That’s exactly why there is a constitutional question on the upcoming August primary ballot to specifically grant the legislature the absolute right to make abortion law and strip the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction in this area. It’s why the legislature tried to pass other constitution questions in this session to change the nominating process of Supreme Court judges and subject them to a more political nominating process or direct elections. The GOP is worried that they don’t currently control high court in Kansas and have made it a priority to change that.
The plaintiffs closing did cite constitutional chapter and verse on where they believe Kansas voting rights are for the court to review and rule.
The lack of preparation of the defense team was appalling. As a taxpayer, I am outraged. Of course I think the entire process is a waste of money. The GOP was warned about litigation, and they shouldn’t have passed a map that was so obviously legally problematic. The complaint goes beyond that. It’s also outrageous from a practical cost efficiency basis. Two of the witness were terrible and their reports and criticism were garbage. Conservatives should be pissed about how little they got for their money.
Additionally, this map was passed in January. The GOP knew lawsuits were coming. AG Derek Schmidt (now running for governor against Laura Kelly) punted. He argued the dismissal before the Kanas Supreme Court, then disappeared. He left the heavy lifting here for others and he didn’t give them much notice or support. One of the defense attorneys mentioned he met the six plaintiff experts on the same day he filed his notice of appearance, a few weeks ago. The defense team didn’t bother to start contacting their own witnesses until March? Over $100,000 for one really bad witness?!?! If it were up to me, I’d garnish the wages of the legislators to claw that money back. Describing this as waste and incompetence doesn’t begin to cover it.
The best defense witness was an expert that has been involved in creating and defending some of the most gerrymandered maps in the country. Not a good profile for an expert that should bring some impartiality in his analysis, but that was the best they could come up with.
I’ll be watching for Judge Klapper’s ruling and post when it is available (again probably coming Monday 4/25. So, this really isn’t the endgame. It is onward and upward.
------------------------—
P.S. Two items I meant to mention in closing thoughts.
As I said, the plaintiffs legal team was stellar. In addition to ACLU Kansas, Barry Grissom, a former US Attorney under President Obama, attorneys from Arnold & Porter, Campaign Legal Center, and attorneys from Elias Law Group were all part of the team. Elias has had several successes in getting gerrymandered maps rejected. Hope that trend continues.
One line of questioning that wasn’t argued was how the senate acted in a “thuggish” manor to get this map passed. Since GOP ignored subpoenas, there wasn’t a way to expose the details of the behind closed doors actions in court. There has been reporting on it.
Senate President Masterson didn’t have the votes to override the veto originally. Senator Mike Thompson (retired local KC area TV weatherman for decades, and now climate denier and vaccine skeptic) was hiding for about 3 hours when the Senate was on lockdown for the override vote. That allowed Masterson time to try finding the remaining couple of votes he needed. He wasn’t able to secure them that day and Senator Thompson was allowed to appear and they dismissed over objections, which gave them an extra day.
Masterson then made a deal with Senator Mark Steffen, a doctor under investigation by the state board. He has earned the title of Dr. Ivermectin in Kansas. He is currently using his office to threaten doctors about denying prescriptions to treat COVID.
GOP leadership offered support for an amendment Steffen was pushing in committee to remove all vaccine requirements for kids in schools. Those negotiations also offered legislation that would shield him from the state’s medical board investigation. Senator Steffen went to the senate floor and made an impassioned statement about how dumping liberal Lawrence into his district would be an extinction level event to his beloved district, much like the Buffalo faced a over a century ago on these same Kansas plains. Then he voted against his own ardent principled stance and to support the map.
After getting the override votes, Masterson exacted some revenge on those that dared cross him. He yanked committee assignments from members that originally opposed him.
Yet, we are supposed to believe this map is just a product of legislative judgement. Right.
Read More
