Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf
Page Number: 45.0

6 

RUCHO v. COMMON CAUSE 

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

seats,  and  to  protect  all  Democratic  incumbents. 
See id., at 503. 

  Using similar technologies and election data as Ho-
feller,  Hawkins  produced  a  map  to  those  specifica-
tions.  Although  new  census  figures  required  re-
moving  only  10,000  residents  from  the  Sixth
District, Hawkins proposed a large-scale population 
transfer.  The map moved about 360,000 voters out
of  the  district  and  another  350,000  in.  That  swap 
decreased the number of registered Republicans in
the district by over 66,000 and increased the num-
ber of registered Democrats by about 24,000, all to 
produce a safe Democratic district.  See id., at 499, 
501. 

  After the advisory committee adopted the map on a 
party-line  vote,  State  Senate  President  Thomas 
Miller  briefed  the  General  Assembly’s  Democratic 
caucuses about the new map’s aims.  Miller told his 
colleagues  that  the  map  would  give  “Democrats  a
real  opportunity  to  pick  up  a  seventh  seat  in  the 
delegation”  and  that  “[i]n  the  face  of  Republican 
gains  in  redistricting  in  other  states[,]  we  have  a
serious  obligation  to  create  this  opportunity.”  Id., 
at 506 (internal quotation marks omitted). 

  The General Assembly adopted the plan on a party-

line vote.  See id., at 506. 

Maryland’s  Democrats  proved  no  less  successful  than 
North  Carolina’s  Republicans  in  devising  a  voter-proof 
map. 
In  the  four  elections  that  followed  (from  2012
through 2018), Democrats have never received more than 
65%  of  the  statewide  congressional  vote.    Yet  in  each  of 
those elections, Democrats have won (you guessed it) 7 of 8