Are Redistricting No-Split Rules Neutral? Post-2020 Ohio as a Case Study

The enforcement of city- and county-preserving “no-split” rules in redistricting can complicate estimations of the expected partisan seat splits and responsiveness of neutral map drawing, even creating the impression that these nominally partisan-blind rules favor one party. This work presents a case study of Ohio’s post-2020 Congressional and legislative redistricting to illustrate how a new spatial analysis technique can quantify the (surprisingly small) statewide and localized impacts of these map-drawing constraints on expected outcomes of neutrally drawn maps, consistent with results from a recently published parametric study of seven populous states. The conversion of votes to seats also appears minimally shifted when building districts out of communities of interest rather than administrative boundaries. The lack of a significant no-split effect is attributed to the low fraction of seats that are in the competitive range and thus possibly impacted by applying no-split rules.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy
Published
2026-08-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15331296261474633
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are Redistricting No-Split Rules Neutral? Post-2020 Ohio as a Case Study

Geoffrey Wise, Kalyn M. Rossiter
Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Are Redistricting No-Split Rules Neutral? Post-2020 Ohio as a Case Study

Geoffrey Wise, Kalyn M. Rossiter
article en

Abstract

The enforcement of city- and county-preserving “no-split” rules in redistricting can complicate estimations of the expected partisan seat splits and responsiveness of neutral map drawing, even creating the impression that these nominally partisan-blind rules favor one party. This work presents a case study of Ohio’s post-2020 Congressional and legislative redistricting to illustrate how a new spatial analysis technique can quantify the (surprisingly small) statewide and localized impacts of these map-drawing constraints on expected outcomes of neutrally drawn maps, consistent with results from a recently published parametric study of seven populous states. The conversion of votes to seats also appears minimally shifted when building districts out of communities of interest rather than administrative boundaries. The lack of a significant no-split effect is attributed to the low fraction of seats that are in the competitive range and thus possibly impacted by applying no-split rules.

Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy
William & Mary (US), Procter & Gamble (United States) (US)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Are Redistricting No-Split Rules Neutral? Post-2020 Ohio as a Case Study — Geoffrey Wise, Kalyn M. Rossiter · Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS