AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In December 2021, during a special legislative session, a new congressional map was introduced, approved, and signed into law, which was challenged by the Real Parties as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander under New Mexico’s Equal Protection Clause. The Real Parties alleged that the map diluted Republican votes by splitting them across all three congressional districts, thereby imposing a severe partisan swing (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court: Denied motions to dismiss and for preliminary injunction, finding a strong case of unlawful political gerrymander that dilutes Republican votes in congressional races in New Mexico (paras 5-6).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioners: Argued that the lawsuit raised a nonjusticiable political question under Rucho v. Common Cause and separation-of-powers principles, asserting that the court should not intervene in what they deemed a political dispute (para 5).
• Real Parties in Interest: Contended that the congressional districting maps enacted in 2021 violated New Mexico’s Equal Protection Clause by using partisan gerrymandering to dilute Republican votes, seeking a declaration that the map is unconstitutional and a preliminary injunction to block the map from taking effect for the 2022 congressional elections (paras 3-4).

Legal Issues

• Whether a partisan gerrymandering claim is cognizable and justiciable under the Equal Protection Clause in Article II, Section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution.
• If such a claim is justiciable, what standards should be applied in its adjudication (para 1).

Disposition

• The Supreme Court of New Mexico granted the petition insofar as declaring the justiciability of a partisan gerrymander claim under the New Mexico Constitution and provided guidance and standards for the district court to resolve a partisan gerrymandering case (para 8).

Reasons

• The Court, led by Chief Justice Bacon, held that a partisan gerrymandering claim is justiciable under the New Mexico Constitution, rejecting the nonjusticiability argument presented by the petitioners. The Court adopted a three-part test for adjudicating such claims, focusing on intent, effects, and causation, and determined that intermediate scrutiny is the appropriate level of scrutiny. The Court emphasized the importance of the right to vote and the constitutional harm caused by egregious partisan gerrymandering, stating that it violates democratic principles and the equal protection guarantee under the New Mexico Constitution. The Court also provided guidance on the evidence that must be considered in such cases, including objective district-specific evidence of vote dilution (paras 21-67).