The Illinois Supreme Court delivered an ultimatum Friday to the state`s political leaders: Draw acceptable legislative districts before Jan. 6 or face the threat of an at-large election for the state House and Senate.
More Top Picks Tents Rooftop
It`s uncertain, though, that the court`s ruling is enough of a club to force a compromise on an issue that has divided Republicans and Democrats since last spring.
In what appears to be a 5-2 decision, the state high court refused to approve a map adopted in October by the Republican-controlled Illinois Legislative Redistricting Commission.
But the court also declined to reject the map outright, adding yet another dose of uncertainty to the coming election season.
The Supreme Court`s majority raised constitutional questions about 42 of the legislative districts on the commission`s map-24 Senate districts and 18 House districts-and sent the matter back to the commission with orders that a new remap plan be approved by Jan. 6.
If a map is not adopted, the majority said, the alternative would be an at-large election for all 177 House and Senate seats, which was last done in Illinois in 1964.
Democrats were pleased with the court`s decision because it gives them another opportunity to undo a map that could have resulted in GOP control of the Senate and gains in the House. Democrats have a 31-28 edge in the Senate and 72-46 advantage in the House.
The map approved by the luck-of-the-draw Republican majority on the commission would have reversed what happened 10 years ago, when Democrats controlled the commission.
Republicans contended that the court`s decision was partisan and complained that the majority opinion did not explain exactly what was wrong with the commission`s map.
”I think I probably share the suspicions of many others that there might have been partisanship involved in this decision,” said Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, who vetoed a redistricting plan approved by the Democratic majority in June. ”It`s unfortunate because I think it will leave the impression that the Supreme Court is very partisan.”
Lawyers for the remap commission promised to go into federal court early next week to head off the threat of an at-large election.
An at-large election would be ”an unmitigated disaster for minorities,” contended Dan K. Webb, a top Chicago litigator hired by the commission`s Republican majority. ”They would lose voting strength throughout the state.” The last statewide at-large election was what has become known as the
”Bedsheet Ballot of 1964,” when voters were forced to choose among 263 House candidates after Gov. Otto Kerner, a Democrat, vetoed a reapportionment bill.
Each party agreed to run 118 candidates for the 177 seats then in the House. The Democratic slate, headed by Adlai E. Stevenson III, won, giving the party an unprecedented two-thirds majority in the House.
”We had one of those (elections), once and the representation leaves a lot to be desired,” said Republican Secretary of State George Ryan.
Lawyers say that as a result of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the federal courts now look with disfavor on at-large elections because they undermine minority voting strength.
In his dissent, Chief Justice Benjamin Miller, a Springfield Republican, also voiced concerns that an at-large election might violate the voting rights law.
Few people, though, thought the chance of an at-large ballot was real.
”But maybe the uncertainty will cause the two parties to agree,” said state Sen. John Cullerton (D-Chicago).
The Supreme Court`s majority identified 10 Senate districts and 6 House districts that it said seemed not to meet the requirements of the Illinois Constitution that legislative districts be compact rather than irregular or elongated.
The majority identified 7 Senate districts and 12 House districts that appeared to violate state constitutional guarantees of free and equal elections by splitting minority populations into two or more districts. The court had questions about the racial makeup and the compactness of another seven Senate districts.
It was the first time that the state high court has said the ”free and equal election” clause of the state Constitution protects against racial discrimination in the redistricting process, according to Jeffrey Colman, a lawyer who had represented Hispanic interests before the court, along with the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund.
The districts singled out by the court are spread throughout the state.
Under the Republican map, the GOP-oriented suburban areas would have gained new districts, reflecting population shifts in the last decade, while minority representation would increase, squeezing white ethnic incumbent Democrats in Cook County and other areas into the same districts.
More Top Picks Towables
Election board officials said the March 17 primary could be held as scheduled if a redistricting plan is approved by Jan. 6.
”It will be a little more hectic, a little more severe, but I think we can do it,” said Daniel White, assistant director of the Illinois State Board of Elections.
The chief problem will be printing ballots in time for the start of absentee voting, White said. Absentee ballots are supposed to be available 40 days before an election.
The court ordered the commission and its opponents to come up with modified plans by Dec. 27. Each side has until early January to file objections to the various proposals.
The commission is supposed to adopt a revised plan and submit it and any other plans it considers, along with supporting census statistics, to the court.
Though the state Supreme Court does not record the votes of justices the way the U.S. Supreme Court does, it appears that voting with the majority were Justice Joseph Cunningham, a Belleville Democrat; Justices William G. Clark, Michael Bilandic and Charles Freeman, all Cook County Democrats; and Justice James Heiple, a Republican from Pekin.
Miller was joined in the dissent by Justice Thomas Moran, a Republican from Lake Forest.