Received 12/18/2017 8:26:29 AM Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA _________________________________________ ) League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, et al.,) ) Petitioners, ) ) No. 261 MD 2017 v. ) ) The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) _________________________________________) PETITIONERS’ POST-TRIAL PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Mary M. McKenzie David P. Gersch* Attorney ID No. 47434 John A. Freedman* Michael Churchill R. Stanton Jones* Attorney ID No. 4661 Elisabeth S. Theodore* Benjamin D. Geffen Helen Mayer Clark* Attorney ID No. 310134 Daniel F. Jacobson* PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER John Robinson* 1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway John Cella (Atty. ID No. 312131) 2nd Floor Andrew D. Bergman* Philadelphia, PA 19103 ARNOLD & PORTER Telephone: +1 215.627.7100 KAYE SCHOLER LLP
[email protected] 601 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20001-3743 Telephone: +1 202.942.5000
[email protected] * Admitted pro hac vice. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1 PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT ..........................................................................5 A. Pennsylvania’s 2011 Congressional Districting Map Was Created in Secret and Enacted in a Highly Unusual and Partisan Manner ........5 B. The 2011 Map Packs and Cracks Democratic Voters, Creating Absurdly Contorted Districts and Dividing Communities..................11 C. The 2011 Map Deliberately Discriminates Against Democratic Voters Based on Their Prior Votes and Projected Future Votes ........38 1. Legislative Respondents Analyzed and Considered Partisan Voting Preferences in Drawing the 2011 Map .........................38 2. Dr. Chen’s Expert Testimony Established That Partisan Intent Was the Predominant Factor in Drawing the Map.........41 3. Dr. Pegden’s Expert Testimony Established That the Map Was Carefully Crafted to Ensure a Republican Advantage......81 4.