| dbo:abstract |
Gill v. Whitford, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering. Other forms of gerrymandering based on racial or ethnic grounds had been deemed unconstitutional, and while the Supreme Court had identified that extreme partisan gerrymandering could also be unconstitutional, the Court had not agreed on how this could be defined, leaving the question to lower courts to decide. That issue was later resolved in Rucho v. Common Cause, in which the Court decided that partisan gerrymanders presented a nonjusticiable political question. Gill arose following the 2011 redistricting plan for the State of Wisconsin created by Republican legislators to maximize the likelihood that the Republicans would be able to secure additional seats in the State legislature over the next few election cycles. The plan was challenged by Democratic citizens, claiming the redistricting plan caused their votes to be "wasted". The case was filed in 2015, and by 2016, the District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin ruled in favor of the Democrats, based on the evaluation of the efficiency gap measure developed for this case, and ordered Wisconsin to redo its districts by 2017. The State appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, which heard the case in October 2017. During the Court's deliberations, it also accepted to hear the merits of another partisan gerrymandering case, Benisek v. Lamone, related to the 2011 redistricting of Maryland's 6th congressional district, for which it heard oral arguments in March 2018. While the majority of political scientists agree that Wisconsin's map was heavily biased, it was expected that the case would center on whether the efficiency gap measures and other metrics provided by political scientists meet the criteria that Justice Anthony Kennedy set forth in his concurring opinion in Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004), a previous Supreme Court case dealing with partisan gerrymandering. Ruling on June 18, 2018, the Court remanded the case to lower courts, finding that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated standing for the case in demonstration of harm, though the Justices were split on to what degree the plaintiffs must show "concrete and particularized injuries". (en) |
| dbo:thumbnail |
wiki-commons:Special:FilePath/House_of_Representati...2014_State_of_Wisconsin.svg?width=300 |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink |
https://www.hastingslawjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/Cunningham-69.6.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4538129/whitford-william-v-nichol-gerald/ https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-1161 https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/gill-v-whitford/ https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/supreme-court-review/2018/9/2018-cato-supreme-court-review-3.pdf https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/585/16-1161/ https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20161122f51 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1161_dc8f.pdf https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/236-275_Online.pdf |
| dbo:wikiPageID |
52731027 (xsd:integer) |
| dbo:wikiPageLength |
36931 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger) |
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID |
1108657577 (xsd:integer) |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink |
dbr:Campaign_Legal_Center dbr:Amicus_curiae dbr:Rucho_v._Common_Cause dbr:F._Supp._3d dbr:North_Carolina_v._Covington_(2018) dbr:Benisek_v._Lamone dbr:Davis_v._Bandemer dbr:Democratic_Party_(United_States) dbr:John_Roberts dbr:Paul_M._Smith dbr:Republican_Party_(United_States) dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Wisconsin dbr:United_States_House_of_Representatives dbr:Vieth_v._Jubelirer dbr:Wasted_vote dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:Maryland's_6th_congressional_district dbr:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg dbr:SCOTUSblog dbr:Redistricting dbr:REDMAP dbr:Clarence_Thomas dbr:Elena_Kagan dbr:Equal_Protection_Clause dbr:Anthony_Kennedy dbr:Stephen_Breyer dbr:Democratic_backsliding dbc:Wisconsin_Legislature dbr:Plurality_opinion dbr:Baker_v._Carr dbr:Barbara_Brandriff_Crabb dbr:William_C._Griesbach dbr:Wisconsin dbr:Wisconsin_State_Assembly dbr:Harvard_Law_Review dbr:Hastings_Law_Journal dbr:Extremism dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Gerrymandering dbr:Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States dbr:Per_curiam_decision dbr:Primary_election dbc:Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States dbr:Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution dbc:United_States_electoral_redistricting_case_law dbr:Kenneth_Francis_Ripple dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:League_of_United_Latin_American_Citizens_v._Perry dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:Efficiency_gap dbr:Polarization_(politics) dbr:Political_science dbr:Sonia_Sotomayor dbr:Freedom_of_association dbr:Neil_Gorsuch dbr:United_States_district_court dbr:Cato_Supreme_Court_Review dbr:Wisconsin_elections,_2018 dbr:US_Census dbr:Wisconsin_State_Legislature dbr:File:House_of_Representatives_diagram_2014_State_of_Wisconsin.svg |
| dbp:arguedate |
0001-10-03 (xsd:gMonthDay) |
| dbp:argueyear |
2017 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:case |
Gill v. Whitford, (en) |
| dbp:concurrence |
Thomas (en) Kagan (en) |
| dbp:decidedate |
0001-06-18 (xsd:gMonthDay) |
| dbp:decideyear |
2018 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:docket |
16 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:first |
Walter (en) Guy-Uriel E. (en) Luis E. (en) |
| dbp:fullname |
Beverly R. Gill, et al. v. William Whitford, et al. (en) |
| dbp:holding |
Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate personal harm, on the basis argued, as a result of alleged partisan gerrymandering and therefore lacked standing. Remanded to District Court for further proceedings. (en) |
| dbp:joinconcurrence |
Gorsuch (en) Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor (en) |
| dbp:joinmajority |
Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan; Thomas, Gorsuch (en) |
| dbp:journal |
dbr:Harvard_Law_Review dbr:Cato_Supreme_Court_Review |
| dbp:justia |
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/585/16-1161/ |
| dbp:last |
Charles (en) Olson (en) Fuentes-Rohwer (en) |
| dbp:litigants |
Gill v. Whitford (en) |
| dbp:majority |
Roberts (en) |
| dbp:otherSource |
Supreme Court (en) |
| dbp:otherUrl |
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1161_dc8f.pdf |
| dbp:oyez |
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-1161 |
| dbp:page |
59 (xsd:integer) 236 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:parallelcitations |
172800.0 |
| dbp:prior |
259200.0 |
| dbp:title |
The Ghost Ship of Gerrymandering Law (en) The Supreme Court, 2017 Term — Comment: Judicial Intervention as Judicial Restraint (en) |
| dbp:url |
https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/supreme-court-review/2018/9/2018-cato-supreme-court-review-3.pdf https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/236-275_Online.pdf |
| dbp:uspage |
____ (en) |
| dbp:usvol |
585 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:volume |
132 (xsd:integer) 2017 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate |
dbt:USRedistrictinglaw dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Cite_journal dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Wisconsin dbt:Ussc dbt:Bluebook_journal dbt:Cite_ssrn dbt:SCOTUS_oral_arguments |
| dbp:year |
2018 (xsd:integer) |
| dcterms:subject |
dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbc:Wisconsin_Legislature dbc:Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States dbc:United_States_electoral_redistricting_case_law |
| rdf:type |
owl:Thing dbo:Case dbo:LegalCase dbo:UnitOfWork wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase |
| rdfs:comment |
Gill v. Whitford, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering. Other forms of gerrymandering based on racial or ethnic grounds had been deemed unconstitutional, and while the Supreme Court had identified that extreme partisan gerrymandering could also be unconstitutional, the Court had not agreed on how this could be defined, leaving the question to lower courts to decide. That issue was later resolved in Rucho v. Common Cause, in which the Court decided that partisan gerrymanders presented a nonjusticiable political question. (en) |
| rdfs:label |
Gill v. Whitford (en) |
| owl:sameAs |
wikidata:Gill v. Whitford https://global.dbpedia.org/id/2e1hE |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom |
wikipedia-en:Gill_v._Whitford?oldid=1108657577&ns=0 |
| foaf:depiction |
wiki-commons:Special:FilePath/House_of_Representatives_diagram_2014_State_of_Wisconsin.svg |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf |
wikipedia-en:Gill_v._Whitford |
| foaf:name |
(en) Beverly R. Gill, et al. v. William Whitford, et al. (en) |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of |
dbr:Whitford_v._Gill dbr:Gill_v_Whitford dbr:Misha_Tseytlin |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of |
dbr:Campaign_Legal_Center dbr:Rucho_v._Common_Cause dbr:Sam_Wang_(neuroscientist) dbr:Benisek_v._Lamone dbr:Brad_Schimel dbr:Davis_v._Bandemer dbr:Paul_M._Smith dbr:Vieth_v._Jubelirer dbr:REDMAP dbr:Lozman_v._City_of_Riviera_Beach_(2018) dbr:William_C._Griesbach dbr:Law_Forward dbr:Gerrymandering dbr:Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States dbr:Efficiency_gap dbr:Redistricting_in_Wisconsin dbr:Redistricting_in_the_United_States dbr:Whitford_v._Gill dbr:Political_question dbr:Ratf**ked dbr:Gill_v_Whitford dbr:Misha_Tseytlin |
| is rdfs:seeAlso of |
dbr:Benisek_v._Lamone |
| is foaf:primaryTopic of |
wikipedia-en:Gill_v._Whitford |
