BALTIMORE (WBFF) — Maryland election officials are asking a Dorchester County judge to reject an effort to block the state’s proposed congressional redistricting constitutional amendment from appearing on the November ballot.
In new filings, the Maryland State Board of Elections, its members, State Administrator of Elections Jared DeMarinis and Secretary of State Susan Lee seek summary judgment in their favor and an expedited ruling.
The case is one of two legal challenges filed against the redistricting-related constitutional amendment approved during the General Assembly’s August special session. The measure, set to appear as Ballot Question 3, would clarify that Maryland constitutional districting standards apply only to state legislative districts, not congressional districts. It would also allow the General Assembly to give the Maryland Supreme Court original jurisdiction over congressional-map challenges.
The Dorchester County lawsuit will remain on the Eastern Shore after a judge denied the attorney general’s motion to move the case, according to Republican state Sen. Chris West, one of the lawmakers who joined the lawsuit.
“[The] judge in Dorchester County rejected the attorney general’s motion, denied the motion to change the venue,” West told FOX45 News in Depth with Mikenzie Frost. “So, this case is going to be tried in Dorchester County on the Eastern Shore, where it should be tried.”
The latest filings from the state argue the plaintiffs’ case fails as a matter of law. Election officials say Maryland’s Constitution gives the General Assembly authority to prescribe the form of a proposed constitutional amendment submitted to voters.
The Republicans behind the suit argue the rushed legislative process violated election-law deadlines and denied voters required notice and an opportunity to comment on the ballot language. But the state says those procedures apply when the Secretary of State drafts a ballot question, not when the General Assembly writes the language itself.
The filing argues that accepting the plaintiffs’ interpretation would prevent the legislature from proposing constitutional amendments after July 1 in an election year, even though the Maryland Constitution requires a qualifying amendment to be submitted at the next general election.
The state also rejects claims that Question 3 is misleading.
The ballot language says the amendment would clarify that “certain standards” in the Maryland Constitution apply only to legislative districts, authorize the General Assembly to give the Maryland Supreme Court original jurisdiction over congressional districting challenges, and require congressional district boundaries to be governed by applicable federal law.
West said the ballot wording is the main distinction between the Dorchester County lawsuit and the earlier case filed in Anne Arundel County.
“The most important issue in our suit is that the language that will appear on the ballot, which every voter will look at just before they cast their vote, is totally misleading,” West said. “It says all this is supposed to do is to clarify existing law. That’s not the case.”
The state’s latest filing argues a reasonable voter would understand that state constitutional standards would apply “only” to General Assembly districts, while congressional maps would be governed by federal law. It also says federal protections, including requirements involving equal population and racial gerrymandering, would remain in place.
The state did acknowledge the full amendment was not posted on the State Board of Elections website by the statutory 90-day deadline. But, according to the filings, the state argues the full bill text was available on the General Assembly website July 29, which was 97 days before the election. The State Board posted the amendment and ballot question Aug. 7, 88 days before Election Day, the state argued.
Election officials say a plain-language summary was posted Aug. 11 and voters will receive specimen ballots before early voting begins.
The state also argues the amendment does not improperly combine multiple subjects into one ballot question, saying all of its provisions relate to the broader subject of election districting.
Even if the court identifies a legal defect, the state argues the judge could revise the ballot wording or divide the proposal into separate questions rather than remove it from the ballot altogether.
The case faces a fast timeline. The state says ballots must be certified and publicly displayed by Aug. 31, with printing expected to begin Sept. 3.
“The whole purpose of this lawsuit is to strike this from the ballot so it doesn’t appear on the ballot because of the misleading language,” West said. “This case must be resolved before the ballots get printed.”
It’s not clear when the case will be heard in court. The first redistricting lawsuit filed in Anne Arundel County, on behalf of the Maryland Freedom Caucus, Senate Minority Leader Steve Hershey and Senate Minority Whip Justin Ready, by the conservative group called the Oversight Project will head to court Tuesday for a hearing.
Follow Political Reporter Mikenzie Frost on X and Facebook. Send tips to mbfrost@sbgtv.com.
Local Story
