Phill Kline: ‘Partisan Redistricting Has Always Been a Part of the American Political Culture’

Kaitlin Housler
SCOTUS

Phill Kline, former Kansas Attorney General, said the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision reaffirmed a longstanding constitutional principle that congressional redistricting is fundamentally a political question reserved for state legislatures.

Kline’s comments come amid the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais that Louisiana’s congressional map, which was drawn to create a second majority-black district, constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

The ruling is already prompting redistricting efforts in multiple states ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Speaking during Thursday’s edition of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show, Kline, who is a Liberty University law professor, argued the ruling drew a clear distinction between race-based districting and partisan redistricting, which he said courts have historically recognized as constitutional.

“The court, and ever since our founding, has recognized that is a political question for state legislatures,” Kline said.

He emphasized how the Court’s decision does not prohibit legislatures from drawing maps that benefit one political party over another.

“Partisan redistricting has always been a part of the American political culture, and it has been acknowledged as constitutional by the court,” Kline said. “They just can’t have animus or an improper reason for such drawing of districts.”

He discussed how states are now actively redrawing districts they believe were previously shaped around unconstitutional racial considerations.

“Numerous states are now acting to redistrict before the election to remedy what they now perceive as unconstitutionally drawn districts that create black majority representation in Congress,” Kline said.

Kline also argued that partisan mapmaking has deep roots in American political history and should not be confused with racial gerrymandering.

“In the 1960s, the Voting Rights Act, as well as the Civil Rights Act, was passed to try to prevent…actions from prohibiting persons of minority interest, as well as targeting specific members of political parties, for improper influence to try to deter them from voting,” he explained.

“Over time, that was implemented in a way that justified the drawing of Black majority districts solely on the basis of race, and the Supreme Court says that’s no longer valid, and it wasn’t valid in the first place,” Kline added.

He pointed to states where Republicans represent a substantial portion of the electorate but hold few congressional seats as evidence that both parties have historically used partisan redistricting to maximize political power.

“You’re going to see Republicans engaged in what the Democrats have done with court sanction over the past 20 years. Now, Republicans are going to be able to do it to match what the Democrats have done,” he noted.

Watch:

– – –

Kaitlin Housler is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network. Follow Kaitlin on X.

 

 

 

 

Related posts

Comments