NewsPennsylvania Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati [official bio] on Wednesday refused [letter, PDF] to produce legislative district data to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court [official website].
On Monday, the Supreme Court had ordered [text, PDF] the parties in League of Women Voters v. Pennsylvania [case materials] to produce “ESRI shape files that contain the current boundaries of all Pennsylvania municipalities and precincts” to facilitate it’s plan to produce a legislative district map if the parties failed to do so by a February 15 deadline. The court imposed the deadline after it struck down [JURIST report] the state’s 2011 district map as a violation of the state constitution[text].
Noting that he and House Speaker Mike Turzai [official bio] have sought a stay from the US Supreme Court [JURIST report], Scarnati described the court’s order as as evidencing its “intention to unconstitutionally usurp the General Assembly’s authority and ability to draw an alternate map.”
Put simply, the January 22 Order [striking down the district map] renders it untenable for the General Assembly to formulate and pass an alternate map within the timeframe established by the Court, thus divesting the General Assembly of any meaningful opportunity to draft a new map compliant in the Court’s eyes. This, in turn, makes it highly likely that the Court, not the General Assembly, will ultimately draft an alternate map.
Scarnati asserts that this plan violates the Elections Clause of the US Constitution [text]. Accordingly, Scarnati stated that he “will not be turning over any data identified in the Court’s Orders.”
The General Assembly, for its part, has submitted the last available mapping data [letter, PDF], although it notes that these files date from the last redistricting in 2011, and that it does not “maintain ESRI shape files that contain current boundaries of all Pennsylvania municipalities and precincts.” The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania [advocacy website] also submitted data files [letter, PDF] for the maps which formed the basis of their experts’ testimony.
