Redistricting cases offer a unique opportunity to test the effects of partisan favoritism in judging and to investigate when partisanship might influence decision making distinctly from ideology. How partisan are federal judges? In an analysis of federal district court cases from 1981 to 2007, this study finds that federal judges are neither neutral arbiters nor crass partisans. Instead, judging in redistricting cases can best be described in terms of constrained partisanship. When redistricting law is clear, judges eschew decision making that furthers their party’s interests. However, where legal precedent is ambiguous, partisan favoritism exacts a strong influence on judicial behavior.
AbramowitzAlanAlexanderBradGunningMatthew. 2006. “Drawing the Line on District Competition: A Rejoinder.” P.S.: Political Science and Politics39:95–97.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenGerberAlanSnyderJames. 2002. “Equal Votes, Equal Money: Court-Ordered Redistricting and Public Expenditures in the American States.” American Political Science Review96:767–77.
3.
Baker v. Carr. 369 U.S. 186 (1962).
4.
BartelsLarry M.2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions.” Political Behavior24:117–50.
5.
BaumLawrence. 2006. Judges and Their Audiences: A Perspective on Judicial Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BickelAlexander M.1962. The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
7.
BramanEileenNelsonThomas E.2007. “Mechanism of Motivated Reasoning? Analogical Perception in Discrimination Disputes.” American Journal of Political Science51:940–56.
8.
Brown v. Thomson. 462 U.S. 835 (1983).
9.
Bush v. Vera. 517 U.S. 952 (1996).
10.
ButlerKatharine Inglis. 2002. “Redistricting in a Post-Shaw Era: A Small Treatise Accompanied by Districting Guidelines for Legislators, Litigants, and Courts.” University of Richmond Law Review36:137–270.
11.
CainBruce. 1985. “Assessing the Partisan Effects of Redistricting.” American Political Science Review79:320–33.
12.
CarsonJamie L.CrespinMichael H.2004. “The Effect of State Redistricting Methods on Electoral Competition in United States House of Representatives Races.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly4:455–69.
13.
ChenSerenaChaikenShelly. 1999. “The Heuristic-Systematic Model in Its Broader Context.” In Dual Process Theories in Social-Psychology, edited by ChaikenShellyTropeYaacov, 73–96. New York: Guilford.
14.
CoxAdam B.MilesThomas J.2008. “Judging the Voting Rights Act.” Columbia Law Review108:1–54.
15.
CoxGaryKatzJonathan. 2002. Elbridge Gerry’s Salamander: The Electoral Consequences of the Reapportionment Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Davis v. Bandemer. 478 U.S. 109 (1986).
17.
DixonRobert G.Jr.1968. Democratic Representation: Reapportionment in Law and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
18.
ElyJohn Hart. 1980. Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
EngstromRichard L.2002. “The Post-2000 Round of Redistricting: An Entangled Thicket within the Federal System.” Publius32 (4): 51–70.
20.
GelmanAndrewKingGary. 1994. “Enhancing Democracy through Legislative Redistricting.” American Political Science Review88:541–59.
21.
GravesScott. 2003. “Competing Interests in State Supreme Courts: Justices’ Votes and Voting Rights.” American Review of Politics24:267–83.
22.
Growe v. Emison. 507 U.S. 25 (1993).
23.
HayesDannyMcKeeSeth C.2009. “The Participatory Effects of Redistricting.” American Journal of Political Science53:1006–23.
24.
Henderson v. Perry. 399 F. Supp. 2d. 756 (2005).
25.
HettingerVirginia A.LindquistStefanieMartinekWendy L.2006. Judging on a Collegial Court: Influences on Appellate Decision Making. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
26.
Hispanic Coalition on Reapportionment v. Legislative Reapportionment Com. 536F. Supp. 578 (1982).
27.
IssacharoffSamuel. 2002. “Gerrymandering and Political Cartels.” Harvard Law Review116:593–648.
28.
IssacharoffSamuelPildesRichard H.1998. “Politics as Markets: Partisan Lockups of the Democratic Process.” Stanford Law Review50:643–717.
29.
Karcher v. Daggett. 462 U.S. 725 (1983).
30.
KarlanPamela S.1996. “Still Hazy After All These Years: Voting Rights in the Post-Shaw Era.” Cumberland Law Review26:287–311.
31.
Kelley v. Bennett. 96 F. Supp. 2d 1301 (2000).
32.
KopkoKyle C.2008. “Partisanship Suppressed: Judicial Decision-Making in Ralph Nadar’s 2004 Ballot Access Litigation.” Election Law Journal7:301–24.
33.
Lance v. Coffman. 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20965 (D. Colorado) (2007).
34.
Larios v. Cox. 542 U.S. 947 (2004).
35.
LevinsonSandford. 2002. “Symposium: Baker v. Carr: A Commemorative Symposium: Panel II: One Person, One Vote: A Theoretical and Practical Examination: One Person, One Vote: A Mantra in Need of Meaning.” North Carolina Law Review80:1269–97.
36.
LloydRandall D.1995. “Separating Partisanship from Party in Judicial Research: Reapportionment in the U.S. District Courts.” American Political Science Review89: 413–20.
37.
LodgeMiltonHamillRuth. 1986. “A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing.” American Political Science Review80:505–20.
38.
LodgeMiltonTaberCharles. 2000. “Three Steps toward a Theory of Motivated Political Reasoning.” In Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality, edited by LupiaArthurMcCubbinsMathewPopkinSamuel, 183–213. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39.
LublinDavidVossD. Stephen1998. “The Partisan Impact of Voting Rights Law: A Reply to Pamela S. Karlan.” Stanford Law Review50:765–77.
40.
LULAC v. Perry. 126 S.Ct. 2594 (2006).
41.
McKeeSeth C.2008. “The Effects of Redistricting on Voting Behavior in Incumbent U.S. House Elections, 1992–1994.” Political Research Quarterly61:122–33.
42.
McKeeSethTeigenJeremyTurgeonMathieu. 2006. “The Partisan Impact of Congressional Redistricting: The Case of Texas, 2001–2003.” Social Science Quarterly87:308–17.
43.
Miller v. Johnson. 115 S. Ct. 2475 (1995).
44.
PoweLucas A.Jr.2000. The Warren Court and American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
45.
Republican Party of Minnesota v. White. 536 U.S. 765 (2002).
46.
Reynolds v. Sims. 377 U.S. 533 (1964).
47.
RowlandC. K.CarpRobert A.1996. Politics and Judgment in Federal District Courts. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
48.
Session v. Perry. 298 F. Supp. 2d 451 (2004).
49.
Shaw v. Hunt. 517 U.S. 899 (1996).
50.
Shaw v. Reno. 509 U.S. 630 (1993).
51.
StephensonMatthew C.2009. “Legal Realism for Economists.” Journal of Economic Perspectives23:191–211.
52.
TheriaultSean M.2008. Party Polarization in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Thornburg v. Gingles. 478 U.S. 30 (1986).
54.
Vieth v. Jubelirer. 541 U.S. 267 (2004).
55.
WilliamsJackson. 1998. “Irreconcilable Principles: Law, Politics, and the Illinois Supreme Court.” Northern Illinois University Law Review18:267–330.
56.
WinburnJonathan. 2008. The Realities of Redistricting: Following the Rules and Limiting Gerrymandering in State Legislative Redistricting. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
