Pennsylvania Supreme Court Gives Democrats a Boost in 2018 Midterms

The court threw out Republican-drawn congressional maps and ordered new maps drawn.

Pennsylvania’s 7th congressional district, drawn to help Republicans maintain a political edge.Mother Jones; National Atlas

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 Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Republican-drawn state congressional map is illegally gerrymandered to benefit the GOP, ordering new maps ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. The decision in one of the country’s most closely watched redistricting battles will provide a boost to Democrats seeking to retake the House of Representatives by giving the party an opportunity to pick up Republican-held seats.

In 2011, Republicans who had swept into power in the wave election the previous November drew one of the country’s most aggressive gerrymanders. Now, Pennsylvania provides a unique opportunity to Democrats in 2018. As Mother Jones previously reported:

While Pennsylvania has roughly equal numbers of Democratic and Republican voters (Donald Trump won here by just 44,000 votes out of more than 6 million cast), for the last six years its congressional delegation has been made up of 13 Republicans and just five Democrats, who mostly represent Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. As Democrats scour the country for the approximately two dozen candidates and winnable districts they’ll need to take back the House, a redrawn congressional map in Pennsylvania could present the party with some prime opportunities to pick up seats.

Monday’s order requires the state’s Republican-led general assembly to draw a new map by February 9 and submit it to the governor—a Democrat—for approval. If the assembly fails to produce any map, or if the governor does not approve it, the state supreme court will produce its own map. The US Supreme Court could block Monday’s decision, but because it involves the interpretation of the Pennsylvania state constitution, such interference with the state court ruling is unlikely. 


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