Also known as: packing · cracking · gerrymandering · vote dilution
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Techniques employed when drawing electoral district lines that concentrate voters of one political party into a limited number of districts or spread them across many districts to reduce their voting power.
Patricia Patel leads a citizens group challenging a state map that packs nearly all her party's voters into a single urban district. The remaining districts are drawn to favor the opposing party by wide margins. A federal court dismisses the suit because the claim rests solely on partisan effects.
Pavel Petrov owns stores along a downtown corridor that the new map splits into three separate districts. The lines disperse his party's reliable voters so none of the districts can elect their preferred candidate. The court refuses to intervene on partisan grounds alone.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Peter Park represents hotel owners whose employees are packed into one overwhelmingly Democratic district under the new map. The plan wastes their votes while creating safe seats for the opposing party elsewhere. Federal judges decline to hear the partisan-gerrymandering claim.
Pierre Poulin's coastal tourism workers see their voting strength cracked when the map combines their city with distant industrial towns. The resulting districts neutralize their influence on tourism policy. The court treats the claim as a nonjusticiable political question.
Priscilla Parks challenges a map that packs her party's supporters into two districts while cracking the rest to guarantee the opposing party's statewide control. The plan produces an outsized legislative majority from a narrow popular vote. Judges dismiss the suit for lack of manageable standards.
Paula Pierce alleges that the legislature cracked swing retail districts across multiple seats to prevent her party from gaining any additional representation. The lines ensure one party retains control despite shifting voter preferences. The court finds the partisan-gerrymandering claim nonjusticiable.
Packing concentrates one party's voters into a few districts so their votes are wasted in landslides. Cracking spreads the remaining voters thinly across many districts so they cannot form a majority anywhere. Both techniques minimize the disadvantaged party's total seats.
Supporting sources
Federal courts lack judicially manageable standards for determining when partisan line-drawing crosses a constitutional line. The Supreme Court has held that such claims present nonjusticiable political questions committed to the political branches.
Packing wastes votes by creating a few overwhelmingly safe districts for the disadvantaged party. Cracking dilutes votes by placing supporters in districts where they remain a minority and cannot elect their preferred candidates.
Supporting sources
Yes. The Supreme Court has upheld state laws that transfer redistricting authority to independent commissions as a permissible method to address partisan gerrymandering under the Elections Clause.
…announced. Of course, it was true that the Court lost something by its misperception, or its lack of prescience, and the Court-packing crisis only magnified the loss; but the clear demonstration that the facts of economic life were different from those previously assumed warranted the repudiation of the old law. The…