United States Supreme Court reverses decision on Wisconsin legislative maps

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WBAY) - The United States Supreme Court has reversed the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s judgment regarding legislative maps backed by Gov. Tony Evers.

The case was remanded for further proceedings.

“On remand, the court is free to take additional evidence if it prefers to reconsider the Governor’s maps rather than choose from among the other submissions. Any new analysis, however, must comply with our equal protection jurisprudence,” reads the majority opinion.

The redistricting maps created an additional majority-Black district in Wisconsin, saying it was necessary to comply with the Voting Rights Act.

CLICK HERE to read the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling.

Opponents argued that there was not sufficient justification to create the district. They argued it was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the maps.

Opponents brought the case to the United States Supreme Court, who reversed that judgment.

“We agree that the court committed legal error in its application of decisions of this Court regarding the relationship between the constitutional guarantee of equal protection and the VRA. We accordingly construe the application for stay presented to JUSTICE BARRETT and by her referred to the Court as a petition for certiorari, grant the petition, reverse the imposition of the Governor’s State Assembly and Senate maps, and remand to the Wisconsin Supreme Court for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

“Summarily correcting the error gives the court sufficient time to adopt maps consistent with the timetable for Wisconsin’s August 9th primary election,” reads the majority opinion.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissent and was joined by Justice Elena Kagen. Sotomayor called the Supreme Court’s action in this case “unprecedented.”

“In an emergency posture, the Court summarily overturns a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision resolving a conflict over the State’s redistricting, a decision rendered after a 5-month process involving all interested stakeholders. Despite the fact that summary reversals are generally reserved for decisions in violation of settled law, the Court today faults the State Supreme Court for its failure to comply with an obligation that, under existing precedent, is hazy at best,” reads the dissent.

The state’s congressional maps remain in place.