Image 01 Image 03

Final New York Court-Approved Redistricting Maps “Cementing Chaos for Democrats”

Final New York Court-Approved Redistricting Maps “Cementing Chaos for Democrats”

Democrats got piggish, and it backfired. Dem Operative: “I knew redistricting was going to result in some mess, but this is just beyond anything I ever imagined…. The NY Democratic Party is in shambles.”

There’s a saying on Wall Street: Bulls make money and Bears make money, but pigs get slaughtered.

New York Democrats were pigs when it came to redistricting. Democrats control every facet of state government, and used that unchecked power to gorge themselves by carving up formerly Republican districts to all but eliminate the NY Republican congressional delegation:

Then Democrats got legally slaughtered in court, with the trial court throwing out the maps and suggesting a Special Master be appointed, which decision was affirmed by the Appellate Division and then the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. We covered the action in these posts:

Late last night, May 20, 2022, the trial court judge accepted the Special Master’s final proposed map, which made some changes from the maps proposed earlier in the week:

In his final maps, Cervas made several changes urged by politicians and members of the public, including reuniting the Bed-Stuy neighborhood in Brooklyn in the new 8th District, instead of splitting it between two. That caused several other districts in Brooklyn to change, including the Staten Island-based 11th Congressional District currently held by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, which picked up the Bensonhurst neighborhood and became a stronger Republican district.

Cervas also made major changes on Long Island, creating a new South Shore-based district and shifting three others to account for it. But he left Manhattan as he proposed on Monday, keeping Midtown in the new 12th Congressional District with the Upper East and Upper West Sides, setting up a potentially explosive primary between longtime Democratic Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler.

Some members of the public, including members of the Jewish community, argued for a map that split Manhattan’s West and East sides rather than the north-south split Cervas had proposed. But Cervas wasn’t persuaded, in part because the “economic and demographic” traits of the areas on either side of Central Park aren’t as different as they once were.

The NY Times reported, Judge Approves N.Y. House Map, Cementing Chaos for Democrats:

A state court formally approved New York’s new congressional map late Friday, ratifying a slate of House districts drawn by a neutral expert that could pave the way for Democratic losses this fall and force some of the party’s most prominent incumbents to face off in primary matches.

The map, approved just before a midnight deadline set by Justice Patrick F. McAllister of State Supreme Court in Steuben County, effectively unwinds an attempted Democratic gerrymander, creates a raft of new swing seats across the state, and scrambles some carefully laid lines that have long determined centers of power in New York City.

Jonathan R. Cervas, the court-appointed mapmaker, made relatively minor adjustments to a draft proposal released earlier this week whose sweeping changes briefly united both Republicans and Democrats in exasperation and turned Democrats against each other.

In Manhattan, the final map would still merge the seats of Representatives Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, setting two Democratic committee leaders who have served alongside each other for 30 years onto a collision course with national implications.

Judge Patrick F. McAllister’s Order read, in part:

The court would first like to correct the misconception that the court’s redistricting maps are a Republican gerrymander. All three courts that reviewed this matter came to the same conclusion that the Respondents had unconstitutionally produced gerrymandered maps. The fact is that Petitioners/Republicans were successful in proving those maps were gerrymandered. However, the result is not that the Petitioners/Republicans now get to draw their own gerrymandered maps. This is not a situation where to the victor goes the spoils. The result is simply that Petitioners get to have neutral maps drawn by an independent special master as approved by the court. Unfortunately some people have encouraged the public to believe that now the court gets to create its own gerrymandered maps that favor Republicans. Such could not be further from the truth. The court is not politically biased. Yes, the trial judge was elected as a Republican, and the justices on the Court of Appeals were appointed by Democrats. The reason all three courts came to the same conclusion was because the courts applied the applicable rules of law in as fair and impartial a manner as possible.

The 2012 congressional map was drawn by a judge with the aid of a special master. That map was fair and impartial. That map resulted in eight Republicans currently being elected to Congress and over the last ten years sometimes more than eight Republicans were elected. The congressional map that was found to be gerrymandered would have only favored four Republicans being elected. The fact that this map will likely result in more than four Republicans being elected to Congress does not mean or indicate in anyway that this map is gerrymandered to favor Republicans. What this map does do is create eight competitive districts in which either party has a reasonable chance to win and three districts in which the Republicans will likely win. On the other hand the Democrats have 15 safe districts. For Republicans to repeat eight members in congress from New York in 2022 will require that they win over half of the competitive districts….

The court would also like to briefly address the criticism that the new maps discriminated against Democrats by placing two incumbents into the same district. The constitution specifically prohibits new maps from being used to ensure a candidate’s reelection or to prevent a candidate’s reelection.

Mirroring the Judge’s explanation, this Politico analysis shows that there are only 3 safe Republican seats (down 1 from the old maps), but 7 competitive seats, which is what has Democrats upset because in a swing year Republicans may do very well in many swing districts.

(Note: The Judge said there are 8 competitive districts, Politico says 7. That may be because the Politico analysis was prior to the release and acceptance of the final map.)

A separate Politico analysis points to the Democrat fear of the new swing districts:

Democrats hold 19 of New York’s 27 seats, and now face the prospect of highly competitive primaries in seats that previously sparked little competition.

A plan that Democrats enacted in February would have made them the favorites in 22 of the 26 seats, following the loss of a district due to population stagnation. Now, Democrats might have advantages on paper in 21 of the 26 districts, but their edge in several of the seats will be slim.

Ithaca formerly was in the solid Red NY-23, and now is in the swing NY-19, which was pro-Biden by 5 points in 2020, recalculated to fit the new district. That may seem like a lot, but in this environment it’s definitely a competitive district:

Here’s the overview of the districts statewide and in New York City:

Democrats are squealing.

So what they’re saying is, this will not be the Summer of Love amongDemocrats?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Will the Waddler waddle his way to victory?

Inquiring minds want to know.

The Gentle Grizzly | May 21, 2022 at 9:23 pm

Hakeem and Jamaal: if your candidates are of sufficient interest to the voters, they will be elected. Affirmative action districts by there very nature are racist.

    TheOldZombie in reply to The Gentle Grizzly. | May 22, 2022 at 1:45 pm

    Agreed. It’s absurd that we build districts based on race.

    Districts should only be drawn on one criteria: the number of people living in the district. No thought should be given to race or any other criteria.

A “dispensing” optician could have sized those glasses to un-pinch his fat face.

Or, as the title of a John Lennon song aptly provides, One Thing You Can’t Hide Is When You’re Crippled Inside.

My how these NY d/prog are squealing. ‘Oh, the humanity, we might have to compete in a primary, how very unfair’. Once these folks get to the acceptance stage they will realize that a primary contest makes the eventual winner that much stronger due to competition.

A primary forces candidates to hone their message, find the best way to communicate their positions in the current environment, hire and evaluate staff in real time during the stress of a competition. All those make for a better, more polished message and a more confident team able to effectively engage voters in the general.

Could it be these NY d/prog feel somehow entitled to be unopposed in a primary, that they shouldn’t have to be forced to compete, that they should be anointed instead?

    Peabody in reply to CommoChief. | May 21, 2022 at 10:13 pm

    I am not well stocked on silver linings. I have enough tucked away to last for several years, assuming that each one last for several washings.

    Peabody in reply to CommoChief. | May 21, 2022 at 10:15 pm

    Oh and thanks for that encouraging post.

      CommoChief in reply to Peabody. | May 21, 2022 at 10:38 pm

      These incumbent d/prog will get over their butthurt and quickly move on to figuring out which other incumbent d/prog they feel is safest to try and shank due to redistricting. Most of these folks haven’t run a competitive race since they were first elected so I sympathize (not) but their narcissism and quest to retain their power and their grift won’t allow them to stand aside for a younger candidate or a candidate with less baggage. Nope it’s an inter party knife fight but the winners will be more formidable.

        Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | May 22, 2022 at 1:09 am

        In the past one of the main objectives redistricting had in mind was to protect incumbents. The new constitutional amendment explicitly forbids that. Hence the stuck-pig act.

          CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | May 22, 2022 at 11:06 am

          Yep. That’s a big part of what makes the d/prog establishment / machine tears taste so sweet. They boxed themselves in with independent redistricting commission which seemed to be designed to freeze out a meaningful r voice at the table.

          Then they rejected the map drawn by the commission. Then got hauled into CT and for once were hoisted on their own petard. Now they are likely stuck with the map until the next census. Which may be little consolation as NY State has already lost the population equivalent to another CD so far with 8 more years of potential further population loss to come.

          TheOldZombie in reply to Milhouse. | May 22, 2022 at 1:51 pm

          Yep. The left loved pushing the whole redistricting has to be “fair” until it hit them square in the eyes that they would also have to live by the new rules. Now they are furious.

    txvet2 in reply to CommoChief. | May 21, 2022 at 11:02 pm

    That isn’t what’s happening here. The runoff is only giving the two competing candidates time to throw more mud at each other. I don’t like either one of them.

      AF_Chief_Master_Sgt in reply to txvet2. | May 22, 2022 at 7:37 am

      This is a perfect opportunity for an AOC acolyte to run, with the primary purpose to unseat entrenched Democrat grifters.

      Let the blood bath begin.

      CommoChief in reply to txvet2. | May 22, 2022 at 8:54 am

      There are at least two CD with incumbent d/prog facing off in primary contests the newly drawn map. Perhaps more as they survey the map to determine the safest CD; highest d+ rate. In a normal year a d+ rate of +6 = probably victory. In a wave year that moves higher, closer to +9. These incumbent d/prog will happily shank each other to get the safest CD. Remember, a candidate doesn’t have to run in the CD where they live, they can choose any CD to contest.

        txvet2 in reply to CommoChief. | May 22, 2022 at 4:51 pm

        I should have been clearer. When I said “here”, I meant in my state district, where you have to be a resident.

So an historically low income district is being split up. Maybe now the residents can get a Representative who can help them. Probably not, but the old way wasn’t doing much good.

Hmm, the new map consolidates several R-leaning areas into the new 9th district. Probably not enough to tip it R, but perhaps enough for a DINO to win the D primary.

Still time for Nadler or Maloney to move to Queens or Bronx/Westchester to run against AOC or Bowman

    Milhouse in reply to RRRR. | May 22, 2022 at 10:24 am

    They don’t have to move. There is no requirement that congress members live in their districts. The only question is whether a significant number of voters in those districts would care about it. Maybe they could promise to move if they win. Moving before running could just be portrayed as “carpetbagging”.

    Edward in reply to RRRR. | May 22, 2022 at 10:29 am

    No need to move, the requirements for US Representative are laid out in the Constitution’s Article One, Section Two: 25 years old, Citizen for at least seven years and resident of the state in which he runs. The SCOTUS has ruled several times that the only way to change that is to amend the Constitution. No Federal or State statute can change the Constitution.

      The Gentle Grizzly in reply to Edward. | May 22, 2022 at 12:37 pm

      How many members of the Houses of Congress really DO reside in the state in which their districts lay (or lie; never got that one figured out)? Seems a lot of them have Georgetown homes they seldom leave.

As I wrote above, the last-minute changes were very significant in Brooklyn. The new 10th district, where De Blasio and I live and which he says he wants to try for, still has a bit of an R-leaning area, but not nearly as much of it as it had in the first draft; the final version moved most of that area into the 9th, together with several other R areas, which is why it appears that that district’s next representative is likely to be, if not an actual R, then a DINO.