Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10542 Page 1 of 276 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ) OF MICHIGAN, et al., ) Case No. 2:17-cv-14148 ) Plaintiffs, ) Hon. Eric L. Clay ) Hon. Denise Page Hood ) Hon. Gordon J. Quist v. ) ) PLAINTIFFS’ SUBMISSION OF ) PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT JOCELYN BENSON, in her official ) AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Capacity as Michigan ) Secretary of State, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) Joseph H. Yeager, Jr. (IN 2083-49) Mark Brewer (P35661) Kevin M. Toner (IN 11343-49) GOODMAN ACKER P.C. Harmony A. Mappes (IN 27237-49) 17000 West Ten Mile, Second Floor Jeffrey P. Justman (MN 390413) Southfield, MI 48075 Daniel R. Kelley (IN 30706-49) Telephone: 248-483-5000 Matthew R. Kinsman (IN 32032-71) [email protected] FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2700 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: 317-237-0300 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiffs US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10543 Page 2 of 276 PLAINTIFFS’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pursuant to the Court’s “Order re: Parties’ Partial Stipulations and Report” (ECF No. 234) and the Court’s instructions at the conclusion of the trial, plaintiffs respectfully submit the attached proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Plaintiffs include their proposed findings based on the evidence and inferences therefrom and their objection (below) to consideration of one exhibit pursuant to the Stipulation, as reserved in the parties’ prior submission of exhibit lists. The Conclusions of Law comply with the Court’s 50-page limit, Trial Ex., ECF 250, PageID# 9350:4-19. Although the Court did not impose a page limit on Findings of Fact, Plaintiffs acknowledge that the Findings attached are voluminous. Plaintiffs tender these Findings and Conclusions in computer searchable format and with a detailed table of contents, as a detailed reference for the Court’s use in preparing its entry. The Findings are unusually lengthy in part because of the large volume of important evidence submitted in this action by stipulations rather than in an open court. The plaintiffs’ counsel stand ready to provide different or additional material as the Court may advise. Objection: Trial Exhibits D-50 and D-52 are hearsay declarations of Dr. Yan Liu and Jeffrey Timmer, respectively, in support of Defendant Secretary of State Ruth US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10544 Page 3 of 276 Johnson’s Motion in Limine to Exclude the Expert Report of Dr. Jowei Chen (ECF No. 147) (collectively, Liu and Timmer “MIL Declarations”). Plaintiffs reserved the hearsay objection to each exhibit within the Secretary’s designation of exhibits (ECF No. 172-2, at 10 (reserving hearsay objection under F.R.E. 802)). Plaintiffs object to admission of these exhibits, on the basis of hearsay. However, should the Court determine the Liu and Timmer MIL Declarations should be admitted, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court also consider the responsive declaration (ECF No. 160-3) of Professor Chen. Professor Chen’s responsive motion in limine declaration was not included in Plaintiffs’ Exhibit Lists largely because of its hearsay rebuttal of the issues raised in the previous two declarations. US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10545 Page 4 of 276 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FINDINGS OF FACT .......................................................................................................... 1 I. Parties and Claims ......................................................................................................... 1 II. The Legislature’s Intent ................................................................................................ 4 A. Republicans started the 2011 redistricting process with an advantage. ............................................................................................................ 4 B. The map drawing process was secretive and excluded any meaningful Democratic input. ......................................................................... 8 The Republicans’ Map Strategy ....................................................................... 8 MRRI’s Role ..................................................................................................... 10 The Secretive Process ..................................................................................... 12 Exclusion of Democrats ................................................................................. 14 C. The Republican-controlled legislature’s objective was to entrench Republican representation and subordinate Democratic voters. ............. 18 Drawing the Congressional Maps ................................................................. 18 Drawing the Senate Maps ............................................................................... 22 Drawing the House Maps ............................................................................... 24 The Republican Chairman and Republican Donors .................................. 25 Extensive Use of Partisan Data ..................................................................... 27 Rushed Legislation Timeline .......................................................................... 31 D. Politics trumped statutory guidelines. ........................................................... 34 III. The Effects of the Redistricting Scheme ................................................................. 38 A. The district level evidence shows vote dilution and/or associated harm at a district level generally, and in each Challenged District. .......... 39 Congressional District 1 ................................................................................. 41 Congressional District 4 ................................................................................. 47 Congressional District 5 ................................................................................. 51 Congressional District 7 ................................................................................. 58 Congressional District 8 ................................................................................. 61 Congressional District 9 ................................................................................. 65 Congressional District 10 ............................................................................... 69 Congressional District 11 ............................................................................... 72 Congressional District 12 ............................................................................... 77 Senate District 8 ............................................................................................... 82 i US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10546 Page 5 of 276 Senate District 10 ............................................................................................. 84 Senate District 11 ............................................................................................. 86 Senate District 12 ............................................................................................. 87 Senate District 14 ............................................................................................. 88 Senate District 18 ............................................................................................. 90 Senate District 22 ............................................................................................. 93 Senate District 27 ............................................................................................. 95 Senate District 32 ............................................................................................. 97 Senate District 36 ............................................................................................. 98 House District 24 ........................................................................................... 101 House District 32 ........................................................................................... 102 House District 51 ........................................................................................... 104 House District 52 ........................................................................................... 106 House District 53 ........................................................................................... 107 House District 55 ........................................................................................... 107 House District 60 ........................................................................................... 109 House District 61 ........................................................................................... 111 House District 62 ........................................................................................... 111 House District 63 ........................................................................................... 112 House District 75 ........................................................................................... 114 House District 76 ........................................................................................... 117 House District