Key Takeaways
- Indiana House Republicans have released a proposed new congressional map for the state, aiming to redraw every one of Indiana’s nine congressional districts to favor Republican candidates.
- The new map seeks to unseat Rep. André Carson (D-Indianapolis) and Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Gary), the two Democrats in the Indiana congressional delegation.
- The bill includes clauses to prevent legal challenges, limiting the ability of lower courts to rule against the map and giving priority to the Supreme Court of Indiana.
- The proposed map would divide Marion County into four districts, potentially affecting the voting power of the state’s largest city and economic driver.
- The bill is currently in the Elections and Apportionment committee in the House and is scheduled for its first hearing on December 2.
Introduction to the Proposed Congressional Map
The Indiana House Republicans have released a proposed new congressional map for the state, as part of President Donald Trump’s redistricting push. The new map redraws every one of Indiana’s nine congressional districts, with the goal of making it so every district is held by a Republican. Currently, seven districts are held by Republicans, and two are held by Democrats. The map was first posted on the Indiana House Republicans website, and the bill to make the map law was introduced in the Indiana House.
The Impact on Democratic Representatives
The map seeks to unseat Rep. André Carson (D-Indianapolis) and Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Gary), the two Democrats in the Indiana congressional delegation. Rep. Carson issued a statement shortly after the map was released, expressing his opposition to the proposal. He stated that "Hoosier values matter more than DC threats and bullying" and that the plan to divide the state’s largest city into four parts is "ridiculous." Carson’s statement suggests that the proposed map is an attempt to undermine the voting power of the state’s largest city and economic driver.
Preventing Legal Challenges
The language of the redistricting bill, authored by Rep. Ben Smaltz (R-Auburn), includes several clauses that seem meant to prevent legal challenges to the bill. The bill states that only the Supreme Court of Indiana can rule against maps passed by state lawmakers, and that there can be no temporary injunctions against the map. Additionally, the bill says that no lower court can rule in favor of an appeal, and that any ruling a lower court might make would be automatically stayed "pending disposition of the appeal by the supreme court." This language suggests that the bill’s authors are attempting to limit the ability of lower courts to challenge the proposed map.
Changes to the Congressional Districts
In addition to restricting which courts can block congressional maps, the bill also redraws the current districts. Under the proposed map, Marion County would be divided between the 4th, 6th, 7th, and 9th districts. The 9th District would stretch from the Ohio River to downtown Indianapolis, while the 7th District would contain just the northeastern corner of the county. The 6th District would cover the southeastern portion of Marion County, and the 4th District would include the northwestern corner of the county. These changes could potentially affect the voting power of the state’s largest city and economic driver.
The Current Status of the Bill
House bill 1032 was introduced on Monday, December 1, and was assigned to the Elections and Apportionment committee in the House, chaired by Rep. Tim Wesco (R-Elkhart). The first hearing is scheduled for 9 a.m. on Tuesday, December 2. If passed by the committee, the bill would move to the full House, and if passed, it would then head to the Senate for a similar, if likely more difficult, path. This is a breaking news story, and updates will be provided as new information becomes available.
Conclusion
The proposed congressional map released by Indiana House Republicans has significant implications for the state’s voting districts and the balance of power in the state’s congressional delegation. The bill’s attempts to prevent legal challenges and limit the ability of lower courts to rule against the map have raised concerns about the democratic process and the potential for gerrymandering. As the bill moves through the legislative process, it is likely to face opposition from Democrats and advocacy groups, and its ultimate fate remains uncertain.