Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf
Page Number: 20

Cite as:  588 U. S. ____ (2019) 

15 

Opinion of the Court 

III 
A 
In considering whether partisan gerrymandering claims
are justiciable, we are mindful of Justice Kennedy’s coun-
sel in Vieth: Any standard for resolving such claims must 
be  grounded  in  a  “limited  and  precise  rationale”  and  be
“clear, manageable, and politically neutral.”  541 U. S., at 
306–308  (opinion  concurring  in  judgment).    An  important 
reason  for  those  careful  constraints  is  that,  as  a  Justice 
with extensive experience in state and local politics put it,
“[t]he  opportunity  to  control  the  drawing  of  electoral 
boundaries  through  the  legislative  process  of  apportion-
ment  is  a  critical  and  traditional  part  of  politics  in  the 
United  States.”  Bandemer,  478  U. S.,  at  145  (opinion  of 
O’Connor,  J.).    See  Gaffney,  412  U. S.,  at  749  (observing 
that districting implicates “fundamental ‘choices about the
nature  of  representation’ ”  (quoting  Burns  v.  Richardson, 
384 U. S. 73, 92 (1966))).  An expansive standard requiring 
“the correction of all election district lines drawn for parti-
san  reasons  would  commit  federal  and  state  courts  to 
unprecedented  intervention  in  the  American  political
process,” Vieth, 541 U. S., at 306 (opinion of Kennedy, J.). 
As  noted,  the  question  is  one  of  degree:  How  to
“provid[e]  a  standard  for  deciding  how  much  partisan 
dominance is too much.”  LULAC, 548 U. S., at 420 (opin-
ion of Kennedy, J.).  And it is vital in such circumstances 
that  the  Court  act  only  in  accord  with  especially  clear 
standards:  “With  uncertain  limits,  intervening  courts—
even  when  proceeding  with  best  intentions—would  risk
assuming  political,  not  legal,  responsibility  for  a  process
that often produces ill will and distrust.”  Vieth, 541 U. S., 
at  307  (opinion  of  Kennedy,  J.).  If  federal  courts  are  to 
“inject [themselves] into the most heated partisan issues” 
by 
claims, 
Bandemer, 478 U. S., at 145 (opinion of O’Connor, J.), they 
must be armed with a standard that can reliably differen-

gerrymandering 

adjudicating 

partisan