What’s at stake as Maryland’s top court hears redistricting case Thursday

Maryland’s highest court will hear hours of arguments Thursday over whether voters should decide on changing rules for drawing congressional districts.

The ruling could mark the end of an angsty year of infighting among Maryland Democrats seeking to seize control of all eight Maryland U.S. House seats. That debate has been set against a backdrop of gerrymandering across the country.

Or the ruling could drag out the district-drawing debate for more months.

It’s been a convoluted journey involving maps, an old court case, national pressure and a party divided. Here’s how we got here.

What’s happening Thursday?

The Supreme Court of Maryland will hear oral arguments over a proposed amendment to the state constitution that voters could decide in the November election.

If approved, the constitutional amendment would change the standards for drawing congressional districts. They could be drawn without considering whether they are compact or cross too many natural boundaries such as waterways or city and county lines.

But the guidelines would still apply to Maryland General Assembly districts.

Two groups challenged the constitutional amendment in court, and lower courts blocked it from the ballot.

The state appealed, and here we are.

Who decided to propose this constitutional amendment anyway?

The constitutional amendment was the creation of Democratic politicians who are hoping to have a free hand when they draw congressional districts in the future.

Maryland has seven Democrats and one Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the state has been under pressure from national Democrats to engineer an 8-0 map, squeezing out Republican Andy Harris.

Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, with the backing of a redistricting commission stacked with allies, proposed a version of an 8-0 map this year, but it stalled and did not pass the General Assembly. A key opponent was Senate President Bill Ferguson, a Baltimore Democrat who cautioned that the map might not pass legal scrutiny.

The move to change the constitution was something of a Plan B compromise that Democrats reached this summer after Moore’s map failed.

Why are people opposed to the constitutional change?

The challengers cited multiple problems with the proposed constitutional amendment:

• The language is confusing and misleading to voters.
• It improperly combined too many changes into one amendment.
• The way it was put on the ballot circumvented a new law that sets a timetable for constitutional amendments.

Two judges agreed with the challengers, who included Republican politicians, a local Republican Party official and a conservative watchdog group.

All along, Republicans have opposed any plans to gerrymander Maryland’s congressional districts to favor Democrats, as well as anything that could make gerrymandering easier in the future — including this constitutional amendment.

So what’s the legal issue over drawing districts?

The last time Maryland drew new congressional districts, after the 2020 Census, Democrats drew an 8-0 map that ended up in court.

Judge Lynne Battaglia ruled that the map violated a part of the state constitution that says: “Each legislative district shall consist of adjoining territory, be compact in form, and of substantially equal population. Due regard shall be given to natural boundaries and the boundaries of political subdivisions.”

Historically, “legislative districts” was interpreted to mean General Assembly districts for state senators and delegates — not congressional districts. But Battaglia essentially said those standards apply to congressional districts, too.

Democrats never appealed the decision, and Battaglia’s interpretation of the state constitution is now the legal standard.

Changing the constitution would make it clear that the words such as “adjoining territory,” “compact in form” and “due regard … to natural boundaries” don’t apply when drawing congressional districts.

When will this be settled?

Soon! The Supreme Court of Maryland is expected to rule quickly on the cases, aware of the looming deadlines to get ballots printed and mailed to voters.

In tight-timeline cases such as this, the court sometimes announces a ruling quickly, with its full opinion explaining its view to be filed later.

What happens next if the constitutional amendment is approved for the ballot?

Maryland voters will choose whether to change the constitution to make gerrymandering easier. The ballot question will not say that directly — that’s one of the points opponents are making — but that’s what the practical effect is.

You can expect to hear arguments for and against, as advocacy campaigns on both sides have sprung up. “Fight Back MD” is urging voters to approve the constitutional amendment, while “Save Our Voice” and “Protect Maryland Votes” are opposed.

If the amendment passes, lawmakers would still need to decide to redistrict later.

Why is this such a big deal?

Typically redistricting is once a decade, but President Donald Trump kicked off a multistate war in 2025 when he demanded that Texas draw new maps to create more Republican-friendly districts. His goal was to ensure Republicans would continue to control the U.S. House of Representatives following the 2028 midterm elections.

A cascade of gerrymanders followed in Democratic- and Republican-led states.

Maryland Democrats received pressure from the national party, including from U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader who visited Annapolis to press his case.