No. 159 MM 2017 in the SUPREME COURT of PENNSYLVANIA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Received 1/10/2018 12:15:49 PM Supreme Court Middle District Filed 1/10/2018 12:15:00 PM Supreme Court Middle District 159 MM 2017 No. 159 MM 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PENNSYLVANIA, CARMEN FEBO SAN MIGUEL, JAMES SOLOMON, JOHN GREINER, JOHN CAPOWSKI, GRETCHEN BRANDT, THOMAS RENTSCHLER, MARY ELIZABETH LAWN, LISA ISAACS, DON LANCASTER, JORDI COMAS, ROBERT SMITH, WILLIAM MARX, RICHARD MANTELL, PRISCILLA MCNULTY, THOMAS ULRICH, ROBERT MCKINSTRY, MARK LICHTY, LORRAINE PETROSKY, Petitioners, v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; THE PENNSYLVANIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY; THOMAS W. WOLF, IN HIS CAPACITY AS GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA, MICHAEL J. STACK III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA AND PRESIDENT OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE; MICHAEL C. TURZAI, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SPEAKER OF THE PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; JOSEPH B. SCARNATI III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PENNSYLVANIA SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE; ROBERT TORRES, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ACTING SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH; JONATHAN M. MARKS, IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSOINER OF THE BUREAU OF COMMISSIONS, ELECTIONS, AND LEGISLATION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Respondents. Review of the Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, No. 261 MD 2017 BRIEF FOR INTERVENORS Lawrence J. Tabas (PA Attorney ID No. 27815) Rebecca L. Warren (PA Attorney ID No. 63669) Timothy J. Ford (DC Attorney ID No. 1031863), Pro Hac Vice OBERMAYER REBMANN MAXWELL & HIPPEL LLP Centre Square West 1500 Market Street, Suite 3400 Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 665-3000 Attorneys for Intervenors January 10, 2018 5222697 v1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE SCOPE AND STANDARD OF REVIEW ..... 3 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE QUESTIONS INVOLVED ............................. 4 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE CASE ............................................................... 4 I. Reliance on the 2011 Plan Prior to Commencement of the Action .................. 4 II. Counterstatement of the Form of Action and Brief Procedural History .......... 7 III. The 2018 Elections Schedule ............................................................................ 8 IV. Pennsylvania Voting Patterns Since Enactment of the 2011 Plan..................11 V. Harm to Intervenors ........................................................................................12 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ...............................................................................14 ARGUMENT ...........................................................................................................16 I. The General Assembly must be given the first opportunity to correct congressional districts. ....................................................................................18 A. A new reapportionment plan by court order—without giving the General Assembly a chance to pass a new plan—raises separation-of-powers concerns. ....................................................................................................19 B. Petitioners have offered no evidence that the General Assembly would be unwilling to draw new congressional districts. .........................................21 C. The General Assembly must have a “reasonable” and “adequate” opportunity to pass a new reapportionment plan. ......................................22 II. Reapportionment would cause “serious disruption” of the 2018 elections. ...24 A. No alternative to the statutorily required election deadlines can be accomplished without significant cost and logistical challenges to the Commonwealth—and more especially to the counties—or risking voter confusion. ...................................................................................................25 B. An outdated map may be used for the next congressional election. ..........32 III. Petitioners’ requested relief cannot be granted without harming the Intervenors. .....................................................................................................34 A. Butcher does require balancing Petitioners’ interests. ...............................35 B. The Intervenors’ legally protected interests are relevant to this case. .......38 C. Petitioners have delayed in bringing their case. .........................................40 i IV. The difficulties surrounding relief support a conclusion that Petitioners have not shown that this partisan gerrymandering claim is justiciable. ..................42 CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTED .......................................................45 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH WORD COUNT ...............................47 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY ............48 ii TABLE OF CITATIONS Cases Albert v. 2001 Legis. Reapportionment Comm'n, 790 A.2d 989 (Pa. 2002) .... 21, 38 Annenberg v. Commonwealth, 757 A.2d 338 (Pa. 2000) .......................................... 3 Butcher v. Bloom, 203 A.2d 556 (Pa. 1964). ... 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 31, 33, 35 Butcher v. Bloom, 216 A.2d 457 (Pa. 1965) ..................................................... 19, 23 Commonwealth v. Williams, 129 A.3d 1199 (Pa. 2015) ..........................................41 Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U.S. 109, 143 (1986) ................................................ 19, 45 Erfer v. Commonwealth, 794 A.2d 325 (Pa. 2002) ................................ 3, 19, 38, 45 Garcia v. 2011 Legis. Reapportionment Comm’n, 938 F. Supp. 2d 542 (E.D. Pa. 2013) .....................................................................................................................33 Holt v. 2011 Legis. Reapportionment Comm'n, 38 A.2d 711 (Pa. 2012) ... 21, 31, 40 Holt v. 2011 Legis. Reapportionment Comm’n, 67 A.3d 1211 (Pa. 2013). 19, 23, 33 In re Street, 451 A.2d 427 (Pa. 1982) ......................................................................34 In re Vodvarka, 140 A.3d 639 (Pa. 2016) ................................................................28 Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. Assembly, 377 U.S. 713 (1964) ..................... 22, 24, 35 Milk Control Comm'n v. Battista, 198 A.2d 840 (Pa. 1964) ..................................... 4 Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224 (1993) ...........................................................43 Pa. Envtl. Def. Found. v. Commonwealth, 161 A.3d 911 (Pa. 2017) ........................ 4 Pap’s A.M. v. City of Erie, 812 A.2d 591 (Pa. 2002) ..............................................32 Pileggi v. Aichele, 843 F. Supp. 2d 584 (E.D. Pa. 2012) .........................................33 Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964) ............................................................. 20, 33 Singer v. Sheppard, 346 A.2d 897 (Pa. 1975) ........................................................... 4 Stilp v. Commonwealth, 905 A.2d 918 (Pa. 2006) ..................................................... 4 Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267 (2004) ............................................................ 42, 43 iii Vieth v. Pennsylvania, 195 F. Supp. 2d 672 (M.D. Pa. 2002) .............. 20, 22, 23, 27 White v. Weiser, 412 U.S. 783 (1973) .....................................................................21 William Penn Sch. Dist. v. Pa. Dep’t of Educ., 170 A.3d 414 (Pa. 2017) ...............43 WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo, 377 U.S. 633 (1964) .......................................... 16, 24, 35 Working Families Party v. Commonwealth, 169 A.3d 1247 (Pa. Commw. 2017) .34 Constitutional Provisions Pa. Const. art. I § 7 ...................................................................................................34 Pa. Const. art. I § 20 .................................................................................................34 Pa. Const. art. II § 16 ...............................................................................................44 Pa. Const. art. II § 17 ...............................................................................................16 U.S. Const. art. I § 4 .................................................................................................19 Statutes 25 Pa. C.S. § 2602(f). ........................................................................................ 29, 31 25 Pa. C.S. § 2642. ..................................................................................................... 9 25 Pa. C.S. § 2753(a) .................................................................................. 10, 25, 29 25 Pa. C.S. § 2868 ......................................................................................... 8, 25, 29 25 Pa. C.S. § 2872.1(12) ..........................................................................................28 25 Pa. C.S. § 2961 ....................................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 2962 ....................................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 2963 ....................................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 2964 ....................................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 2968 ....................................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 3011(c) ...............................................................................................26 25 Pa. C.S. § 3146.2a(a)...........................................................................................26