The issues of where different people vote in the state and who their leaders may be are now in the hands of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Consultants Jonathan Cervas of Carnegie Mellon University and Bernard Grofman of the University of California-Irvine delivered their analysis of the legislative map proposals drawn by various people and groups, including Governor Tony Evers, the Republican Legislature, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, Senate Democrats, Law Forward, Petering (FastMap), and the Wright Petitioners. Cervas and Grofman are familiar with the process, according to Common Cause Wisconsin Executive Director Jay Heck. Cervas assisted in the New York Legislature’s efforts to rid itself of its gerrymandered maps, leading to Republicans taking five additional seats. Grofman participated in a similar process in Virginia, making things more competitive for Democrats. According to the Associated Press, the pair said the maps drawn by the Republican Legislature and WILL were partisan gerrymanders, while the others were closer to the guidelines set forth by the courts. All of the maps would keep Republicans in the majority but by slimmer margins in some of them. Cervas or Grofman explicitly endorsed none of the maps. After Evers rejected another attempt by the Legislature to submit new legislative boundaries earlier this week, Heck says it is up to the courts to decide.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has until March 15th to choose a map so it can be used for the fall election. Heck is not ruling out a possibility that an appeal could be made regardless of which map is chosen. It is not the only election-related issue the Wisconsin Supreme Court is being asked to consider. Democratic presidential candidate Dean Phillips is trying to get his name on the April ballot to go against President Joe Biden after election leaders left him off.