The New York Congressional Gerrymander: A Social Science and Policy Lesson

Through a series of strategic maneuvers New York Democrats enacted a congressional districting plan. Republicans challenged it as a partisan gerrymander and New York courts sided with Republicans. As is often the case in court proceedings, evidence was offered on both sides of the question. For purposes here, the important point is that in reaching its conclusion the court rejected evidence from widely endorsed social science gerrymandering metrics, including metrics that have been written into proposed congressional legislation to curb partisan gerrymanders. We first ask why. Our answer is that as applied to states with lopsided partisan divisions, such as New York, the social science metrics either do not apply or otherwise do not necessarily ask and answer the right question. After considering how the New York courts went about considering the evidence, we conclude with a recommendation for how social science academics and those entrusted with actual policy making power could formulate and answer the right question, covering states with either competitive or lopsided partisan competition.