Notes 📍

Redistricting aka gerrymandering is the process of drawing communities of common interest into roughly equal population districts for purposes of political representation. Sounds simple enough, but communities of common interest is often hard to define and also is subject to legal, historical, political and customary traditions that further distort representation.

Understanding MAUP

The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) is a statistical bias that occurs when point-based data (like individual votes) is aggregated into larger geographic units (like electoral districts). In redistricting, MAUP reveals how the same underlying voter preferences can produce vastly different political outcomes depending entirely on where boundaries are drawn—a phenomenon known as the zonal effect.

Gerrymandering is essentially the strategic exploitation of MAUP: by “packing” or “cracking” specific groups, mapmakers can manipulate these arbitrary boundaries to intentionally favor one party or candidate, even if the overall population’s data remains unchanged. This inherent instability in spatial data makes it possible for multiple “valid” maps to exist that lead to contradictory electoral results. 

Incumbency First, Friendship and Ideology Second, Partisanship Third

Legislators first and foremost care about themselves, and their closest colleagues and friends, followed by power usually which is based on which party controls each branch of the legislature, whether it local, state or federal. People often think of gerrymandering as being primarily partisan in nature, but often it’s about defending those who are closest in friendship and ideology, though party power is an important third leg on the stool in the process.

How the System Works Currently in New York

In 2014, voters created the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) to take the lead in map-drawing. However, the process allows the state legislature to take control and draw its own maps if it rejects two consecutive proposals from the commission. This “fail-safe” has been the primary source of the legal battles seen over the last several years

The Current Map Status

• Congressional Maps: The current lines were signed into law by Governor Hochul in February 2024 after the Democratic-led legislature rejected a proposal from the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) and drew their own. These maps are set for use through the 2026 and 2028 elections, barring further court orders.
• State Assembly & Senate: New Assembly boundaries were enacted in April 2023 following a court-ordered redraw. State Senate maps, originally drawn by a court-appointed “special master” for the 2022 cycle, remain in effect. 

Recent Court Developments (2026)

• Congressional District 11 Dispute: In January 2026, a state judge ruled that the 11th District—currently the only Republican-held seat in New York City—unconstitutionally diluted the voting power of Black and Latino residents.
• U.S. Supreme Court Intervention: On March 2, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked that ruling, allowing the existing map to stay in place for the 2026 elections while appeals continue in New York state courts.

A Future of “Perpetual Redistricting”?

Governor Kathy Hochul and Democratic leaders are currently advancing a constitutional amendment that would allow New York to redraw congressional lines as early as 2028. 

• The Goal: Democrats aim to counter Republican redistricting efforts in other states following recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have impacted the Voting Rights Act.
• The Process: For this to happen, the state legislature must pass the amendment in two consecutive sessions, after which it must be approved by New York voters.

The Proposed 2028 Amendment

A state Senate bill (S8467) introduced by Democratic leaders seeks to amend the New York State Constitution with the following key details: 

• Mid-Decade Trigger: The amendment would authorize New York to redraw its congressional lines outside the standard 10-year census cycle if another state has engaged in mid-decade redistricting. This is intended as a “defensive” measure against Republican gerrymandering in other states.
• Legislative Control: The new House maps would be drawn directly by the State Legislature rather than the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC).
• Approval Thresholds: The amendment could allow the legislature to approve new congressional maps with a simple majority instead of the two-thirds supermajority currently required when one party controls both chambers.
• Suspension of Anti-Gerrymandering Rules: To avoid the legal defeats seen in 2022, some Democrats have suggested the amendment could include a temporary suspension of the state’s anti-partisan gerrymandering rule, which currently prohibits drawing lines to favor one party. 

Status of Current Map Disputes (2026)

While the long-term amendment is being debated, there have been recent attempts to change specific districts: 

• District 11 (Staten Island/Brooklyn): A state judge recently ruled this district unconstitutionally diluted minority voting power and ordered it redrawn to include more Black and Latino voters from areas like Manhattan. However, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked this order in March 2026, keeping the existing lines in place for the current election cycle.
• 2024 Revisions: The maps signed into law in February 2024 included “minor” changes that slightly benefited incumbents in District 3 (Suozzi) and District 18 (Ryan) while making District 22 more difficult for Republicans. 

Potental Next Steps for an Amendment

For these changes to take effect by 2028, the amendment must:

1. Pass the State Legislature in two consecutive sessions (e.g., 2026 and 2027).
2. Be approved by New York voters on a statewide ballot, likely in November 2027. 

Off -year, odd-year elections can pose problems for progressive-backed constitutional amendments. Democrats often turn out at much lower levels then Republicans on odd years when there is few state or federal offices up for election in November. Most New York City competitive races occur during the primary in June, and there is no mayoral race in New York City in 2027.

In November 2021, New York Proposal 4, Allow for No-Excuse Absentee Voting Amendment was defeated by the voters after advocacy of the state GOP, spinning the amendment as a way to manipulate elections. New York voters have repeatly rejected constitutional amendments that they view as politicians putting a finger on the scale of democracy.

Noting the risk, if the legislature were to move forward on amending the constitution, New York’s State Constitution (Article III, Section 4) contains several anti-gerrymandering rules that are currently central to the debate over the proposed 2028 amendment. 

The Primary Rule Targeted for Suspension

The most significant rule that some Democrats have discussed “stripping” or temporarily suspending is the explicit prohibition on partisan intent. 

• Partisan Power Grab: Republicans like Assembly Leader Will Barkley have slammed the proposed 2028 amendment as “purely political and self-serving,” designed only to help Democrats flip House seats.
• Undermining Voter Intent: The 2014 amendment that created the IRC was approved by New York voters specifically to end partisan gerrymandering. Opponents argue that dismantling the commission or ignoring its 10-year cycle ignores the will of the people.
• Creating “Perpetual Redistricting”: Critics warn that allowing mid-decade redraws will lead to constant political instability and confusion for voters, who may see their district lines and representatives change every two years.
• Maintaining the Independent Ideal: Groups like the League of Women Voters argue that while the IRC has had issues, the solution is to improve its funding and independence rather than disbanding it or returning full control to partisan politicians.

• The Intent Rule: The constitution states that districts shall not be drawn for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents, particular candidates, or political parties.
• The Conflict: Supporters of the 2028 amendment argue that this rule “handcuffs” New York while other states draw highly partisan maps. Suspending this would theoretically allow the legislature to draw maps with the explicit goal of gaining seats for their party to counter national trends. 

Other Rules That May Be Bypassed or Modified

The proposed amendment and related legislation also seek to change several procedural and substantive requirements: 

• The Decennial Requirement: The constitution currently permits redistricting only once every 10 years following the federal census. The proposed Senate Bill S8467 would bypass this to allow a mid-decade redraw in 2028.
• The Two-Thirds Majority Vote: Currently, when one party controls both houses of the legislature, a two-thirds “supermajority” is required to approve maps if they reject the commission’s proposals. The amendment would allow for approval by a simple majority.
• The “Block-on-Border” Rule: This technical rule requires that certain small jurisdictions (like towns or city blocks) remain intact within a single district rather than being split. Some reform proposals aim to eliminate this to provide more flexibility in drawing lines.
• The Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) Mandate: While some leaders say they want to keep the IRC, the amendment would allow the legislature to forgo the commission entirely for mid-decade redistricting, giving lawmakers immediate control over the maps. 

Core Protections Unlikely to Change 

Despite these proposed shifts, other fundamental “fair map” criteria remain part of the conversation and are generally required by federal law: 

• Equal Population: Districts must contain an equal number of inhabitants “as nearly as may be”.
• Contiguity and Compactness: Districts must consist of “contiguous territory” and be as “compact in form as practicable”.
• Voting Rights Act (VRA) Compliance: New York must still follow federal rules that prohibit the dilution of minority voting power, though recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have complicated how these are applied.

Arguments FOR Changing the Process

Supporters, primarily Democrats and some reform advocates, argue the current system is broken and leaves the state vulnerable. 

• National Fairness & “Fighting Fire with Fire”: Proponents argue New York must be able to redraw its lines mid-decade to counter Republican gerrymandering in other states. Governor Hochul stated she should not be “handcuffed” while other states manipulate maps to maintain congressional control.
• Inherent Flaws in the IRC: Critics of the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) point out its structural deadlock. Because it is evenly split with five members from each party, it frequently fails to agree on maps, which forces the process into the courts or back to the legislature.
• Protecting Minority Voting Power: Advocates for change argue the current maps—and recent court rulings—dilute the influence of Black and Latino voters, particularly in New York City.
• Legislative Expertise: Some argue the State Legislature is better positioned than a court-appointed “special master” to balance complex local interests and legal requirements when maps are struck down. 

Arguments AGAINST Changing the Process

Opponents, including Republican leaders and some “good-government” groups, argue that proposed changes would destroy non-partisan safeguards. 

• Partisan Power Grab: Republicans like Assembly Leader Will Barkley have slammed the proposed 2028 amendment as “purely political and self-serving,” designed only to help Democrats flip House seats.
• Undermining Voter Intent: The 2014 amendment that created the IRC was approved by New York voters specifically to end partisan gerrymandering. Opponents argue that dismantling the commission or ignoring its 10-year cycle ignores the will of the people.
• Creating “Perpetual Redistricting”: Critics warn that allowing mid-decade redraws will lead to constant political instability and confusion for voters, who may see their district lines and representatives change every two years.
• Maintaining the Independent Ideal: Groups like the League of Women Voters argue that while the IRC has had issues, the solution is to improve its funding and independence rather than disbanding it or returning full control to partisan politicians.