The Pennsylvania Gerrymandering Case Is Over. The Good Guys Won.

The new congressional map enacted by the Pennsylvania state supreme court.Pennsylvania Supreme Court/www.pacourts.us

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

The Pennsylvania redistricting case is over. Thanks to the way election law works, the Republican appeal went straight to a 3-judge district court, which unanimously denied their arguments to overturn the new map. This ruling can be appealed only to the Supreme Court, but a few hours later the Supreme Court turned down a similar request to overturn the new map. There were no dissents.

So that’s that. The 2018 election will be held under a map that’s been drawn fairly, and that’s likely to mean Democrats will pick up three or four seats. It’s more bad news for Republicans.

If you’re in a pessimistic mood, this ruling doesn’t mean much since the Republican case was really weak from the start. If you’re in an optimistic mood, it might suggest that the Supreme Court is becoming less tolerant of blatant gerrymandering. Perhaps that means a favorable ruling is in store in the big gerrymandering case currently pending?

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest