The court believes that congressional map diluted the voters of Democrats and favored Republicans. The party registrations show that Democrats surpass Republicans statewide.
Justice Todd wrote, “By placing voters preferring one party’s candidates in districts where their votes are wasted on candidates likely to lose (cracking), or by placing such voters in districts where their votes are cast for candidates destined to win (packing), the non-favored party’s votes are diluted. It is axiomatic that a diluted vote is not an equal vote, as all voters do not have an equal opportunity to translate their votes into representation.”
In addition, she emphasized, “An election corrupted by extensive, sophisticated gerrymandering and partisan dilution of votes is not ‘free and equal.’ In such circumstances, a ‘power, civil or military,’ to wit, the General Assembly, has in fact “interfere[d] to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.”
Traditional requirements for redistricting plan
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated that a redistricting plan must comply with the traditional requirements under the Constitution. It must be:
- composed of compact and contiguous territory
- as nearly equal in population as practicable
- do not divide any county, city, incorporated town, borough, township, or ward except where necessary to ensure equality of population
