Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1161_dc8f.pdf
Page Number: 38

12 

GILL v. WHITFORD 

KAGAN, J., concurring 

stract,” as the Court says is true of the plaintiffs’ dissatis­
faction  with  the  “overall  composition  of  the  legislature.” 
Ante,  at  16.    A  suit  raising  an  associational  theory  com­
plains of concrete “burdens on a disfavored party” and its
members as they pursue their political interests and goals. 
Vieth,  541  U. S.,  at  315  (opinion  of  KENNEDY,  J.);  see 
supra,  at  8–9.    And  when  the  suit  alleges  that  a  gerry­
mander  has  imposed  those  burdens  on  a  statewide  basis,
then its litigation should be statewide too—as to standing, 
liability, and remedy alike. 

III 
Partisan  gerrymandering  jeopardizes  “[t]he  ordered 
working  of  our  Republic,  and  of  the  democratic  process.” 
Vieth,  541  U. S.,  at  316  (opinion  of  KENNEDY, J.).    It  en- 
ables a party that happens to be in power at the right time 
to  entrench  itself  there  for  a  decade  or  more,  no  matter 
what  the  voters  would  prefer.    At  its  most  extreme,  the 
practice amounts to “rigging elections.”  Id., at 317 (inter­
nal  quotation  marks  omitted).  It  thus  violates  the  most 
fundamental of all democratic principles—that “the voters
should  choose  their  representatives,  not  the  other  way
around.”  Arizona State Legislature, 576 U. S., at ___ (slip 
op.,  at  35)  (quoting  Berman,  Managing  Gerrymandering, 
83 Texas L. Rev. 781 (2005)).

And  the  evils  of  gerrymandering  seep  into  the  legisla­
tive  process  itself.    Among  the  amicus  briefs  in  this  case 
are two from bipartisan groups of congressional members
and state legislators.  They know that both parties gerry­
mander.  And they know the consequences.  The congres­
sional  brief  describes  a  “cascade  of  negative  results”  from 
excessive  partisan  gerrymandering:  indifference  to  swing
voters  and  their  views;  extreme  political  positioning  de­
signed  to  placate  the  party’s  base  and  fend  off  primary 
challenges;  the  devaluing  of  negotiation  and  compromise; 
and  the  impossibility  of  reaching  pragmatic,  bipartisan