Rucho v. Common Cause
Case Overview
The Supreme Court held 5-4 in 2019 that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question and are therefore beyond the reach of federal courts. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that while excessive partisanship in drawing district lines is unjust, federal judges have no judicially manageable standards by which to determine when such partisanship is unconstitutional. State courts applying state constitutions remain free to address partisan gerrymandering, as demonstrated in subsequent North Carolina litigation.
The Conclusion
**The Supreme Court held 5-4 that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question beyond federal courts' reach.** Chief Justice Roberts wrote that while excessive partisanship in drawing district lines is unjust, federal judges lack judicially manageable standards to determine when it violates the Constitution. State courts remain free to address gerrymandering under their own constitutions.
No circuit court data for this case.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support