New York Law School’s Digital Commons@NYLS

Wice, Jeffrey M.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Elections, Census, and Redistricting Institute 
12-23-2024 
December 23 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. ELECTIONS, CENSUS & REDISTRICTING UPDATE 
 
REAPPORTIONMENT 
 
New York State Projected to Lose Two Congressional 
Districts After 2030 
 
After several years of historically low growth caused in part by the COVID-19 
pandemic, the nation’s population increased by almost 1% since 2023, representing 
a significant turnaround from the small population gains at the start of this decade. 
 
Last Thursday, the Census Bureau released July 2024 population estimates for the 
country and for each state. The national population reached 340.1 million, up 0.98% 
from 336.8 million on July 1, 2023 — the highest year-over-year increase since a 
jump of 0.99% between 2000 and 2001. 
 
New York State grew by an estimated 129,881 persons last year, representing a 
growth rate 0.7% higher than in 2023. This results in a projected two congressional 
district loss after the 2030 census is taken. The state lost one congressional district 
following the 2020 census and could have held on to that district if 89 more people 
had been counted. 
 
New York last lost two districts after the 2000 and 2010 census cycles. The state lost 
three districts after 1990 and a record five districts after 1980. The possible inclusion 
of a citizenship question in the 2030 census and changes to immigration rules and 
Census Bureau programming by the incoming Trump Administration could also 
impact the state’s census count, caused further loss of congressional representation 
based on how the 2030 census is conducted. 
 
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT LITIGATION 
 
Nassau County Legislature: Coads et al. v. Nassau County & 
NY Communities for Change (NYCC) v. Nassau County 
 
On December 16th, the county defendants submitted their exhibit list ahead of trial, 
which included 195 materials. The Action I and Action II plaintiffs also submitted a 
joint pretrial exhibit list on December 16th, which included a total of 257 materials. 
Hearings on the case were held in the Westchester County state supreme court and 
will continue into January. 
 
Appellate Division (2nd Department): Clarke v. Newburgh 
 
The Appellate Division’s Second Department held a hearing in the appeal of Clarke 
v. Newburgh last week. The court is being asked to reverse a ruling by the Orange 
County state supreme court invalidating the New York Voting Rights Act. A decision 
is expected shortly. 
 
 
 
ELECTION LAW 
 
Harvard Law Election Law Clinic Supports NYC Even Year 
Voting 
 
The Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School has sent a letter to the New York City 
Council supporting Resolution No. 189-A (an amendment to the New York State 
Constitution to move New York City elections to even-numbered years). The letter 
argues that a change by the city to hold its elections in even years “will prevent 
potential violations of federal and state law.” The study argues that “it is unlawful for 
states and local governments to maintain off-cycle elections if they have a racially 
disparate effect.” You can read the letter here: bit.ly/41NdzJR. 
 
CAMPAIGN FINANCE 
 
NYC Campaign Finance Board Begins Releasing Payments 
 
The NYC Campaign Finance Board has released its first payments (with seven more 
payments to be made in the future) through the Campaign Finance Program to 
certified candidates for the 2025 Citywide Elections. The candidate list features 174 
participants, listed here. The voluntary program matches small-dollar contributions 
from New York City residents. This first payment totaled $4,844,084 to nineteen 
candidates. 
  
As described by the Board, “The Program empowers more candidates to run for 
office, even without access to wealth; ones who join can build viable, competitive 
campaigns for office by relying on support from their neighbors.” The program is 
meant to incentivize candidates to financing their campaigns through engaging with 
New Yorkers, rather than seeking larger contributions from special interests.  
  
Any candidate running for municipal office (borough president, city council, 
comptroller, mayor, public advocate) may join the program. The program does not 
include state or federal offices or county district attorney offices. All candidates must 
fulfill four requirements to be considered eligible, listed here. There are spending 
limits and restrictions, as well as limits on public funds.  
  
Board Chair Frederick Schaffer also released a statement on Mayor Eric Adams’ bid 
for reelection. As part of its statement, the Board stated, “… There is reason to 
believe the Adams campaign has engaged in conduct detrimental to the matching 
funds program, in violation of law, including the Campaign Finance Act and Board 
Rules… Accordingly, Mayor Adams’ campaign for reelection has failed to 
demonstrate eligibility for public funds payment at this time.” 
 
CENSUS DATA 
 
Census Funding and Understanding the Use of Data 
 
 
 
The U.S. Census Bureau will be funded under a continuing resolution until March 
2025. 
 
On December 5th, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability held a 
hearing on the oversight of the Bureau, where Bureau Director Robert Santos 
testified. This testimony focused on the efficacy of the 2020 Census, the American 
Community Survey (ACS), and the role the Bureau plays throughout the federal data 
ecosystem. This hearing experienced many statements of mis- and disinformation 
about the census process which failed to be corrected. To receive more accurate 
information on the Bureau’s efforts, check the Bureau’s website. The Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights has released a statement urging Congress to 
support an independent, full-funded Census Bureau. 
 
For concerns about how data is collected and used, the Brennan Center has 
released a report that provides an overview of the “strong, long-standing legal 
protections” that prohibit both the Bureau and any part of the federal government 
from using census data against individuals who participate in the census. 
 
AROUND THE NATION 
 
Michigan Legislature Fails to Vote on Michigan Voting Rights 
Act in Last Session 
 
Last week, the Michigan legislature failed to vote on the Michigan Voting Rights Act 
(MIVRA). The Democratic majorities in the Michigan House and Senate were unable 
to pass the MIVRA before the clock ran out on the 2024 session. 
 
The MIVRA is a historic bill for statewide voting protections and would have “codified 
protections against voting discrimination, strengthened access to the polls, and 
ensured all eligible voters maintain their freedom to vote.” This session was the last 
opportunity for the legislature to pass the MIVRA. 
 
A recent poll by Impact Research, conducted on behalf of the NAACP Legal Defense 
Fund, revealed that 77% of Michigan voters supported a state voting rights act, 
including 66% that “strongly supported” the passage of the MIVRA. Only 8% of 
polled Michiganders opposed the bill. The support shows a bipartisan interest, as the 
majority of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans were all in favor of the 
MIVRA. About 8-in-10 of the Michiganders polled view protecting voting rights in 
Michigan as very important. 
 
Seventy-five civil and voting rights leaders across Michigan and the U.S. urged the 
legislature to pass the MIVRA. The failure to do so will leave minority groups 
vulnerable to potential attacks on the electoral system during the next term. 
Democrats lost control of the Michigan House last month in the elections so chances 
of passage by the House next year are not realistic. 
 
UPCOMING EVENTS 
 
 
 
New York “American Community Survey” (ACS) Census 
Conference 
 
“ACS On the Road” on January 28, 2025: Join New York Law School, New York 
Counts, the Population Reference Bureau, New York City Planning Department, and 
the U.S. Census Bureau to learn how different data users in New York City use 
American Community Survey (ACS) data. We will conclude with small breakout 
sessions where you will have the opportunity to interact with Census Bureau staff 
and share what you need to better use ACS data in your own work.  
 
The event will be held at New York Law School, 185 West Broadway, Manhattan 
from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM. Registration is required. You can register here: 
https://nyls.wufoo.com/forms/qnqo80v1iobqqa/. 
 
 
The N.Y. Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is supported by grants 
from the New York Community Trust, New York Census Equity Fund, the 
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the New York City Council. This report was 
prepared by Jeff Wice & Alexis Marking. 


English

December 23 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

NYLS Law Review 
Volume 68 Issue 2 Article 4 
January 2024 
Volume 68.2 Table of Contents 2023-2024 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review 
Recommended Citation 
Volume 68.2 Table of Contents 2023-2024, 68 N.Y.L. SCH. L. REV. (2024). 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for 
inclusion in NYLS Law Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please 
contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
New York Law School Law Review
A Case with No Winners:  
Lessons from Nigeria v. Process &  
Industrial Developments Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hattie Middleditch 85
Notes
The Trafficking Victims Protection Act:  
A Path to End Forced Prison Labor?  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eric Spiniello 115
Obscenity and the Art of Drag:  
How the Current Obscenity Test Enables  
LGBTQ+ Speech Suppression.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  Syma Birenbaum 137
VOLUME 68 • 2023/24
CONTENTS
© Copyright 2023/24 New York Law School Law Review
SIM CITY
NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL LAW REVIEW
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review


Volume 68.2 Table of Contents 2023-2024

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1117/thumbnail.jp

Falati, Shahrokh

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
11-20-2024 
NYLS Patent Law Clinic Visits Harvard Medical School 
Shahrokh Falati 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Law students in the Patent Law Clinic of 
The Plumeri Center for Small Business 
Empowerment at New York Law School (NYLS) 
visited Harvard Medical School (HMS) last 
month. The opportunity arose when the two 
inventors in Boston reached out to our clinic, 
seeking assistance related to a new technology 
they had invented for the ophthalmology industry. 
After discussions within our clinic centering on 
the nature of the invention and its timelines, our 
group decided to accept them as a new client, 
adding to our clinic’s medical innovation docket.
Patent Law Clinic students have worked with inventors at Yale 
Medical School; UT Health Houston’s McGovern Medical School; 
the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA; and The University 
of Central Florida College of Medicine. The medical technologies 
that clinic students have assisted their clients with include new 
technologies related to hip implants; probiotics and maintaining 
healthy intestines; cervical cancer; treatments for trachoma and 
hepatitis C; and now this innovative new medical device for the 
ophthalmology industry.
Here, NYLS students reflected on their recent visit to Boston and 
their experience working with these inventors and the innovative 
medical technology they have invented. 
Christine (Ji Yun) Park ’26
My visit to Harvard Medical School in Boston was an experience I 
will remember. The excitement of exploring this world-renowned 
institution in the heart of the city was evident when I woke 
up early in the morning that day. The vibrant atmosphere on 
campus, coupled with gorgeous fall weather, made my arrival 
truly memorable, something unforgettable. This was my first 
visit to Harvard campus. As I looked around, it was inspiring to 
see and be able to recognize the familiar logos like Dana-Farber 
Cancer Institute and other well-known hospitals all in one area 
surrounding the medical school campus.
As a Patent Law Clinic member at NYLS, I have had the opportunity 
to work with passionate inventors seeking help in securing patent 
rights for their inventions. Meeting inventors at the medical school 
was equally fascinating and rekindled the passion that initially 
drew me to this field. The enthusiasm of the two inventors we 
are representing at Harvard Medical School reminded me of the 
importance of supporting their aspirations and the impact that 
innovative ideas can have on society. My visit to Harvard left me 
feeling motivated and reflective on my own journey. The experience 
not only broadened my understanding of the patent landscape but 
also reinforced my commitment to making a difference in the lives 
of passionate inventors. It was a truly eye-opening and inspirational 
experience that I will carry with me throughout my career.
Daria Denisenko ’26
Visiting Harvard Medical School with the Patent Law Clinic was 
an invaluable experience that brought our classroom learning 
into real-world practice. Our clinic was retained by two final year 
Harvard medical students to assist them in securing a patent for 
their eye surgery device — a potentially transformative invention 
in ophthalmologic medicine. The trip to Boston provided a unique 
opportunity to sit in the same room with our clients, discuss the 
invention in detail, and ask questions essential to our work as their 
legal counsel. The in-person meeting provided an opportunity to 
apply what we have learned by directly interacting with the two 
inventors. We worked in three small groups on behalf of our clinic 
to address three key topics and answered our clients’ questions 
during the 2.5-hour meeting.
This hands-on experience was more than just a meeting; it 
broadened my understanding of patent law, medicine, teamwork 
in our clinic, and — most importantly — the value of intellectual 
property in advancing innovations. Working under Professor Falati’s 
guidance has revealed the critical role that intellectual property 
(IP) law plays in protecting new technologies and bringing new 
innovations to market.
NYLS Patent Law Clinic Visits 
Harvard Medical School
 Professor Shahrokh Falati ’08  •  Published November 20, 2024
  
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Continuing this project with the Harvard team is an incredible 
opportunity to deepen my knowledge of patent processes and 
contribute to a medical advancement that could improve patient 
care. This collaboration reinforces my commitment to IP law and 
my desire to work at the intersection of law and technology. 
Collaborating with my classmates has also emphasized the 
importance of teamwork in achieving shared goals and provided 
valuable preparation for my future career as a lawyer.
Reflecting on our trip to Boston, I realize how crucial hands-on 
experience is in bridging the gap between theory and practice, 
especially in a complex field like patent law. I am grateful for this 
opportunity to work alongside brilliant medical minds and gain 
practical experience that has enriched my learning.
Daniel Bonaventura ’26
The trip to HMS was an awesome experience for me and 
a testament to the high level of education and practical 
opportunities provided by Professor Falati in the Patent Law Clinic, 
NYLS Legal Services, and New York Law School as a whole. On 
this trip we met with two inventors seeking to patent a new and 
innovative medical device.  It meant a lot to see how passionate 
they were about their invention andhow excited they were to be 
working with our clinic.  We also were given a tour of the HMS 
campus which is both beautiful and inspiring. This hands-on 
experience is irreplicable in a classroom and strongly increased my 
knowledge and understanding of the patent process, in addition 
to other aspects of intellectual property. As someone who studied 
Business Administration with concentrations in Marketing and 
Entrepreneurship Management in undergrad, there is practically 
nothing that excites me more academically than to interact with 
entrepreneurs, startups, and new ventures in general.  Through 
this experience at Harvard and through the clinic in general, I have 
been allowed to resume the entrepreneurial work that excited 
me in college, while building a legal foundation that is essential to 
being an IP lawyer or to start my own business. On reflection, I 
feel fortunate to have found an area of law that I am so passionate 
about, and I am enjoying learning more about it in doctrinal classes 
and as a member of the clinic.
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.
Patent Law Clinic of The Plumeri Center for Small 
Business Empowerment at New York Law School 
The Patent Law Clinic, directed by Professor Shahrokh 
(Seve) Falati ’08, is a yearlong clinic, providing 2L and 3L 
students an opportunity to work with entrepreneurs and 
practice patent law before the U.S. Patent and Trademark 
Office (USPTO). 
Experiential Learning at New York Law School 
Experiential learning is an integral part of the NYLS 
education. Through our top-tier programs, we offer students 
the opportunity to turn theory into practice: Starting in their 
first year, students participate in counseling, interviewing, 
and negotiating exercises in their foundational Legal Practice 
course. During their upper-level years, students may select 
from a wide array of experiential learning courses to hone 
their lawyering skills. Together with a comprehensive legal 
education, these experiential offerings prepare our students 
for careers in advocacy.
From left to right: Professor Falati, Juliana Recchia ’26, Christine Park ’26, 
Daniel Bonaventura ’26, Eric Siletzky ’26, Brooke Fulmer ’26, Ismael Mamdu 
’26, Daria Denisenko ’26, and Jack Rucigay ’25


NYLS Patent Law Clinic Visits Harvard Medical School

SEPTEMBER 25, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/tricario_institute_events_flyers/1003/thumbnail.jp

James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the Business of Law and In-House Counsel

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
James Tricario Jr Institute for the Business of 
Law and In-House Counsel Event Posters 
9-25-2024 
Lunch Meeting | An Introduction to the Tricarico Institute for 1Ls 
James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the Business of Law and In-House Counsel 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/tricario_institute_events_flyers 
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Since 1891
Professor Michael Pastor, the 
Director of the James Tricarico 
Institute for the Business of Law 
and In-House Counsel, will give 
an overview of the Institute and 
discuss how students can get 
involved in activities and projects 
that will enhance their legal skills 
and help them successfully 
pursue in-house opportunities in 
law school and beyond.
LUNCH MEETING 
An Introduction to the  
Tricarico Institute for 1Ls
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2024
12:45 P.M.–1:45 P.M. 
W520
RSVP at www.nyls.edu/JTIrsvp
Lunch will be provided to those who register.
N\"llP&ooL James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the Business of Law and In-House Counsel 


Lunch Meeting | An Introduction to the Tricarico Institute for 1Ls

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1085/thumbnail.jp

Bancamper, Jennifer

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
5-1-2024 
Professor Penelope Andrews Participates in International Peace 
Institute Panel 
Jennifer Bancamper 
Marketing&Communications@nyls.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Recommended Citation 
Bancamper, Jennifer, "Professor Penelope Andrews Participates in International Peace Institute Panel" 
(2024). NYLS Community News. 86. 
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/86 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History & Archives at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has 
been accepted for inclusion in NYLS Community News by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. 
For more information, please contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
For International Women’s Day on March 8, John Marshall Harlan II Professor 
of Law Penelope Andrews, Director of the NYLS Racial Justice Project, joined 
a significant panel discussion hosted by the International Peace Institute (IPI) 
in collaboration with the Malala Fund and the Atlantic Council. The discussion 
addressed the reality of Afghan women and girls facing systematic oppression 
under Taliban rule, and highlighted the global efforts being made to ensure justice 
for these abuses.
The panelists, including Nobel Peace Laureate Malala Yousafzai and other human rights experts and diplomats, 
shed light on the crimes perpetrated by the Taliban and emphasized the urgent need for international 
recognition and action. As an internationally renowned expert on gender, apartheid, and law, Professor Andrews 
addressed the systemic denial of civil and political rights for women in Afghanistan.
“It’s not just garden-variety discrimination against women, which we see everywhere, including in this country. 
It’s more a system of oppression and a vicious system of eviscerating people’s lives,” said Professor Andrews. 
“We should recognize that by calling [gender apartheid] what it is, we can create the conditions for people to 
be able to live dignified lives.”
The event was co-sponsored by the Global Justice Center, Rawadari, the Georgetown Institute for Women, 
Peace and Security, and the Permanent Missions of Mexico and Malta.
Professor Penelope Andrews 
Participates in International 
Peace Institute Panel
Jennifer Bancamper  •  Published  May 1, 2024
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.


Professor Penelope Andrews Participates in International Peace Institute Panel

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1091/thumbnail.jp

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
5-23-2024 
New York Law School Honors the Class of 2024 at 132nd 
Commencement Exercises 
Jennifer Bancamper 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
New York Law School Honors 
the Class of 2024 at 132nd 
Commencement Exercises
  Jennifer Bancamper  •  Published May 23, 2024
On Monday, May 20, the warm spring air buzzed 
with excitement as New York Law School’s Class 
of 2024 entered the historic Beacon Theatre. 
The theatre—which opened during NYLS 
alumnus Jimmy Walker’s tenure as New York City 
Mayor—came to life with the joyful chatter of the 
graduating class and the proud NYLS community 
members there to celebrate them.
Dean and President Anthony W. Crowell called the ceremony 
to order with a warm welcome to the graduates and their loved 
ones. He introduced Jennifer Vega ’24, who passionately sang 
a rendition of the National Anthem. Student Bar Association 
President Lindsay Kantor ’24 then took the stage to welcome her 
peers and commend their unwavering perseverance.
“It amazes me how much the Class of 2024 has accomplished,” 
Kantor rejoiced. “We have all shown a remarkable resilience and 
dedication to our community, but also to gaining knowledge of the 
law and upholding the rule of law.”
Dean Crowell returned to the podium to recognize honored 
guests, esteemed alumni, trustees, faculty, and this year’s 
honorary degree recipient and keynote speaker, The Honorable 
Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix.
In tune with the ceremony’s theme of “Public Service and Civic 
Fame,” Dean Crowell reflected on the School’s rich civic history, 
commemorating the dynamic public service of several NYLS 
alumni who helped shape New York City into what it is today.
“Civic Fame” refers to the iconic gilded statue standing atop the 
Municipal Building overlooking City Hall. Depicting a woman holding 
a crown representing New York City’s five boroughs and a shield 
and laurel branch symbolizing victory, Civic Fame embodies the City 
government’s commitment to public service and civic engagement.
Addressing the graduating class, Dean Crowell noted, “You follow 
133 years of alumni who didn’t sit back, but instead jumped off the 
sidelines and took charge, shaped the city and world around them, 
and held each other accountable. You will soon have your moment 
to create real and enduring change. There will be setbacks, and 
timing is everything. But courageous leadership, unbreakable 
integrity, genuine empathy, and an appreciation for the long game 
will allow all of you to win out in the end. It is completely within 
your power if you are willing to work for it. As you go out these 
doors, be the leaders I know you to be.”
Then came the time to honor the exemplary Hon. Hinds-Radix, 
Corporation Counsel of the NYC Law Department. In addition to 
receiving an honorary degree, Hon. Hinds-Radix accepted the Civic 
Fame Award––presented by Center for New York City Law Director 
Ross Sandler––on behalf of the Law Department, honoring their 
courageous leadership through the immense challenges the City 
has faced throughout its history.
In her address to the graduating class, Hon. Hinds-Radix wisely 
advised: “Be mindful of the rule of the law. Guard it, for it is one 
of the pillars of our nation’s foundation. Be an advocate for your 
clients, and in your advocacy, always be honest, true, and ethical. 
The ethical positions that you take may not always please those 
around you, or the ones you’re giving it to, but it will reward you in 
shaping who you are.”
The ceremony then reached an interlude, during which violinist 
Grace Shim ’24 performed a captivating rendition of Bach’s Partita 
for Unaccompanied Violin No. 3 in E Major, Prelude.
The awarding of prizes followed, with Dean of Faculty and 
Professor William P. LaPiana presenting the Otto L. Walter 
Distinguished Writing Awards to authors of outstanding published 
work. This year’s faculty winners included Professors Richard 
Chused, Shahrokh Falati ’08, Claire R. Thomas ’11, Heather E. 
Cuculo ’03, and F. Peter Phillips ’87. This year’s student winner 
was Melissa Rosenberg ’24.
The first student speaker Danielle Drugan ’24 then took the stage 
to deliver her remarks. She reflected on the challenges she faced 
as a first-generation student and noted how NYLS served as the 
“guiding compass” that helped her “navigate the uncertain path 
ahead with confidence.”
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Dean LaPiana returned to the stage to award graduating finalists 
the Trustees’ Prize for the highest average. Senior Associate Dean 
for Academic Affairs Matt Gewolb then presented the Alfred L. 
Rose Award for Excellence and the Joseph Solomon Award for 
Excellent Character and Fitness.
The second set of student remarks came from Konstantine 
Tettonis ’24 Evening, who spoke about his immigrant family, 
public service, and being mentored by Dean Crowell since he was 
a high school student. His speech underscored the paramount 
importance of guidance and support in legal education.
Following his mentee, Dean Crowell returned to the podium to 
present the President’s Medal Award to Benjamin DeCosta ’75, 
who received the honor a second time. DeCosta imparted three 
wishes for the graduates: 1) the vision to see beyond the horizon 
and anticipate future trends; 2) the power to adapt to cultural 
changes; and 3) the courage to stand firm, do the right thing, and 
always uphold the rule of law. He added a fourth, humorous wish: 
for all the graduates to pass the bar exam the first time.
Recipient of the Kathleen Grimm Medal for Distinguished Public 
Service Alexandra Ogunsanya ’24 then approached the podium 
to accept the honor. Ogunsanya reflected on why she chose to 
pursue law and shared the sentiment that ultimately led her to 
NYLS: “Becoming a lawyer is the path not only to my dreams, but 
to helping to build the dreams of others. I have never been more 
certain about a decision in my life.”
President of the Alumni Association E. Drew Britcher ’84 then 
welcomed the graduates to the alumni community before 
Associate Dean and Vice President for Institutional Advancement 
and Chief Development Officer Jeff Becherer introduced the 
legacy graduates. The ceremony reached its most heartwarming 
moment as the graduates shared their moment of achievement 
with their relatives who had also graduated from NYLS. The 
audience was particularly touched when graduating siblings 
James Kelly ’24 and Nora Kelly ’24 graced the stage together, 
presenting their diplomas to each other.
One by one, the remaining graduates walked across the stage to 
receive their diplomas from Dean Crowell, many of them flashing 
proud, twinkling smiles to their loved ones in the audience.
Finally, the moment arrived––Board of Trustees Chair Arthur N. 
Abbey ’59 conferred the degrees, officially marking the Class 
of 2024 graduates of law. Electrified by final congratulations and 
the dazzling starting notes of Frank Sinatra’s “New York, New 
York,” the Class of 2024 cheerfully rose from their seats. All eyes 
were on them as they stepped out into the bright city sunshine, 
empowered with the fierce dedication of budding leaders greeting 
the world that awaits their embrace.
Congratulations, Class of 2024!
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.


New York Law School Honors the Class of 2024 at 132nd Commencement Exercises

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
8-26-2024 
August 26 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. ELECTIONS, CENSUS & REDISTRICTING UPDATE 
  
REDISTRICTING 
  
Orange County Legislature to Hold Public Hearing Tomorrow 
  
The Orange County Legislature will hear from the public tomorrow at a public hearing 
for comment on a draft county legislative map to be used beginning in the 2025 
county legislative elections. The hearing will take place in the county legislature’s 
chambers at 255 Main Street in Goshen, NY starting at 5:00 PM. The hearing can be 
viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/c/OrangeCountyNewYork 
  
ELECTION LAW 
  
New York Court of Appeals Upholds Mail-In Voting Law 
  
In a 6-1 ruling, the New York Court of Appeals upheld a state law that allows all 
registered voters to cast their ballots via mail-in voting. The decision affirmed lower 
court rulings that found the law—titled the “Early Mail Voter Act” and that went into 
effect last January—did not violate the New York Constitution.  
  
Republican challengers, led by U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik, argued that New 
York’s constitution requires individuals to vote in person. Chief Judge Rowan Wilson 
stated in the majority opinion that while the question was “difficult,” the court 
evaluated versions of New York’s constitution as early as 1777 and concluded that 
the current constitution “contains no language that explicitly requires in-person 
voting.”  
  
In the 2018 presidential election and earlier, New York voters were only allowed to 
mail in their votes (via absentee ballot) when there were special circumstances that 
prevented them from voting in person, such as serving in the military or 
incarceration. However, this changed in the spring of 2020 when then-Governor 
Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order permitting voters to cast mail-in ballots 
without a special reason, specifically to prevent the spread of COVID-19. As a result, 
1.5 million New Yorkers voted via mail-in voting. 
  
Prior to the passage of the Early Mail Voter Act, Democratic lawmakers proposed an 
amendment to the New York Constitution in 2021. New York voters rejected this 
proposal (that also included other unrelated election law issues such as redistricting). 
  
Mail-in voting is different from absentee voting. The New York Constitution limits 
absentee voting to when you are sick, have a disability, or are out of town. However, 
early mail voting has the same effect. Mail-in voting allows your ballot to be mailed to 
you. Once completed, it can either be mailed back to the Board of Elections (BOE), 
carried into an early voting location during the early voting period, or carried into a 
 
 
regular polling place on Election Day. If you mail your ballot back to the BOE, your 
ballot must be postmarked no later than November 5, or Election Day. 
  
ELECTIONS 
  
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Questioned Over Fraudulent Campaign 
Signatures 
  
Recently, a New York judge barred Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from appearing on 
November’s ballot, finding that the presidential candidate falsely claimed to live in 
New York State. This decision was appealed by Kennedy. Now, Kennedy’s 
campaign faces a second lawsuit, this time by two voters in Mineola State Supreme 
Court.  
  
The voters, backed by the Democrats, allege that the campaign employed a firm 
whose subcontractors “used deceptive tactics to gather signatures to qualify him for 
the ballot.” The voters have asked the court to order the New York State Board of 
Elections to keep the presidential candidate’s name off the November ballot.  
  
On Thursday, Kennedy admitted in a court appearance that his campaign submitted 
thousands of fraudulent signatures that were collected by a subcontractor—despite 
being aware that some of the canvassers had used deceptive methods. The lawsuit 
contains multiple claims of fraud, but the most common tactic was to fold the top of 
petition sheets down. By doing so, signers could not see the names of Kennedy or 
his vice presidential candidate, Nicole Shanahan, and could be told they were 
signing a petition for other reasons or in support of other candidates.  
  
Through the subcontractor, the Kennedy campaign collected and submitted 150,000 
signatures. New York only requires independent candidates to gather petitions with 
45,000 voter signatures. The campaign sued the subcontractor, stating the campaign 
still had to pay despite receiving signatures that were unusable.  
  
However, Kennedy admitted in court that his campaign did not throw out all the 
subcontractor’s signatures. Instead, the campaign found approximately 8,000 
signatures that had visible creases and placed them in two bankers’ boxes labeled 
as “fraud box.”  
  
The Kennedy campaign then created an affidavit, which intended to “cure” the rest of 
the subcontractor’s petitions. This affidavit had canvassers affirm in writing that no 
fraud had been committed during the collection of signatures. Then, the campaign 
submitted more than 12,000 signatures to show that some signatures had been 
collected without deceptive practices.  
  
In court, the plaintiffs showed at least one creased page that was submitted as 
evidence to the state instead of placed in the “fraud box.” Kennedy admitted that the 
subcontractor’s canvassers sometimes also verbally misrepresented what or who the 
signatures were for, meaning that there were more ways the signatures could be 
fraudulent than just creased pages. 
  
 
 
On Friday, Kennedy announced that he would be suspending his presidential 
campaign. He then endorsed Donald Trump. 
  
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT LITIGATION 
  
Nassau County Legislature: Coads et al. v. Nassau County & 
NY Communities for Change v. Nassau County 
  
Two lawsuits  with coordinated discovery challenging the Nassau County 
Legislature’s 2023 redistricting map, which went into effect on February 28, are 
expected to go to trial together this fall. The decision could impact the Nassau 
County legislative districts for the 2025 elections. 
  
On August 16, correspondence was filed with the court. The NYCC plaintiffs and 
defendants wrote jointly regarding the new requests for admissions (“RFAs”) that 
the NYCC plaintiffs intend to propound and the parties’ disputes over RFAs already 
propounded. On August 22, the court filed a notice in response to this letter that 
identified which requests for admission the parties must respond to. 
  
In the notice, the court stated that some of the requests for admission were denied 
because they “go beyond the proper use of requests for admission, are the subject of 
Judicial Notice or pre-trial stipulation, seek interpretation of documents, or are more 
properly the subject of questions as examination before trial.”  
  
On August 23, a stipulation concerning the disclosure of the identity of a consultant 
(whose name was redacted by the defendants in their document production from 
March 15, 2024), has now been agreed upon and the identity will be released to the 
plaintiffs. However, the plaintiffs may not reference or rely on the disclosure of the 
consultant’s identity “in support of their position,” whether raised in connection with a 
motion or otherwise. 
  
Correction to 8/19 Update: These two cases are coordinated for discovery 
purposes, but have not been consolidated. 
  
AROUND THE NATION 
  
ARIZONA: The U.S. Supreme Court has delivered a 5-4 decision that only partly 
grants the requests of the Republican National Committee (RNC) in regard to a 2022 
Arizona voting law. The RNC had asked the Court to pause the lower court’s ruling 
on the same law, of which the Court granted—for now.  
  
This decision allows Arizona to enforce a section of state election law that “requires 
election officials to reject state voter registration forms that are submitted without an 
applicant’s proof of U.S. citizenship” while an appeal proceeds. However, the Court 
also rejected some portions of the RNC’s request.  
  
Arizona has a “complicated, two-track system” for registering voters: a state 
registration and a federal registration. Each registration is accepted, but with varying 
requirements. This system is the result of a “decades-long dispute” regarding proof 
 
 
of citizenship. Arizona state law requires individuals to have documentary proof of 
citizenship when registering to vote in state and local elections. 
  
Prior to this Supreme Court ruling, any eligible voter who submitted Arizona’s voter 
registration form without providing proof of citizenship would only be registered to 
vote in federal elections. The only exception to this rule was if election officials were 
able to access an individual’s record of citizenship proof that they had previously 
provided to Arizona’s Motor Vehicle Division. Arizona’s Secretary of State reported 
that 42,301 voters in Arizona were only registered to vote in federal elections as of 
July 1, 2024. Whether these registered voters will be allowed to vote in future 
presidential elections after November 2024 without showing proof of citizenship is to 
be determined by future court proceedings.  
  
The Supreme Court did not give a detailed reasoning, as is common in emergency 
applications. Oral arguments before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are 
scheduled to begin on September 10. 
 
Thank you to NPR for the detailed report. 
  
TENNESSEE: A federal court has dismissed a lawsuit in Tennessee where a 
challenged a state statute that required voters to be “bona fide members” of a 
political party in order to vote in Tennessee’s open primary elections or otherwise a 
threat of criminal prosecution.  
  
A group of voters and the League of Women Voters of Tennessee brought the case, 
alleging that the law is “unconstitutionally vague,” intimidates and suppresses voters 
from casting a ballot, and does not explain how an individual can become a “bona 
fide” member of a political party. Additionally, Tennessee voters do not register as a 
member of a specific political party under the state’s open primary system. 
  
In last Monday’s ruling, the court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue. The 
court also held that even if the plaintiffs had standing to sue in this case, the 
defendants (which included the Tennessee Secretary of State and the Tennessee 
Attorney General) have “sovereign immunity,” which shields government officials 
from lawsuits without their consent. 
 
The N.Y. Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is supported by grants 
from the New York Community Trust, New York Census Equity Fund, the 
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the New York City Council. This report was 
prepared by Jeff Wice & Alexis Marking. 
 


August 26 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
2-27-2024 
February 27 Roundtable Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. CENSUS & REDISTRICTING ROUNDTABLE UPDATE 
 
REDISTRICTING 
 
    Legislature Rejects Commission Map & Draws Its Own 
On Monday, February 26th, the legislature rejected the Independent 
Redistricting Commission’s congressional map. It will now be up to the 
legislature to enact a new map of its own. 
In the Senate,  40 members voted to reject the map while 17 voted in favor of 
the IRC proposal. All Democrats voted to reject the map ( with the exception 
of state Sens. Simcha Felder and Andrew Gounardes. In the Assembly, the 
map was rejected by a 47-99 vote. 
Both chambers are expected to vote on a new map that makes several 
changes to the IRC’s version. After the vote, Democrats in the Assembly and 
Senate released a new map (S. 8653A/A.9310A) that made changes to a 
number of districts, 
According to an analysis by Steve Romalewski at CUNY’s Graduate Center 
for Urban Research: 
  
District 1 lost 48,136 people from the IRC configuration to proposed District 3 
under the legislature’s plan. This is 6.2% of District 1’s population. 
  
District 2 lost 48,188 people to District 1.  This is 6.2% of District 2’s 
population. 
  
District 3 lost 48,136 people to District 2. This is 6.2% of District 3’s 
population. 
  
District 14 lost 44,210 people to District 16. This is 5.69% of District 14’s 
population. 
  
District 15 lost 44,557 people to District 14. This is 5.73% of District 15’s 
population. 
  
District 16 lost 45,683 people to District 15. This is 5.88% of District 16’s 
population. 
  
District 18 lost 30,015 people to District 19. This is 3.86% of District 18’s 
population. 
 
 
  
District 19 lost 30,015 people to District 18 and lost 29,714 people to District 
21. Combined, this represents 7.69% of District 19’s population. 
  
District 20 lost 27,960 people to District 21. This is 3.6% of District 20’s 
population. 
  
District 21 lost 29,714 people to District 19 and lost 27,960 people to District 
20. Combined, this is 7.42% of District 21’s population. 
  
Source: Analysis of census data by Center for Urban Research, CUNY Graduate Center 
The legislature is expected to vote on the new map by Wednesday (although 
it could vote earlier if the Governor issues a message of necessity.  
Legislature Limits Redistricting Challenges to Four Counties 
The legislature is expected to approve legislation this week that limits 
redistricting challenges to four county state supreme courts in New York City, 
Westchester, Albany, and Erie counties. 
According to bill sponsor Senator Zellnor Myrie, the bill would require 
redistricting challenges to be  brought in counties where at least one plaintiff 
lives in order to modernize the procedures for bringing redistricting challenges 
and allow these courts to develop an expertise in redistricting litigation. 
The legislation would also end the situation where challenges brought against 
the same map could be heard be several state courts at the same time. 
The bill cleared the Senate on February 26th and is expected to be considered 
by the Assembly Government Operations Committee on February 28th. 
People’s Hearing on NYS Redistricting 
  
On February 20, several New York organizations, including League of 
Women Voters of NY and Common Cause NY, held a “People's Hearing” 
event to discuss the state’s redistricting process and gather community 
feedback on the IRC’s proposed Congressional plan. A summary of the 
hearing testimony is attached. 
  
ELECTION LAW 
  
NYC Noncitizen Voting Law 
  
 
 
A state appeals court has ruled that a New York City law, which would allow 
non-citizens to vote in local elections, is unconstitutional. The law authorized 
green card holders and other residents with federal work authorization to vote 
in local elections. This law would have applied to 800,000 new eligible voters.  
  
In a 3-1 decision, the court ruled that the law violated the New York State 
Constitution and Municipal Home Rule Law. Article IX provides that elected 
officials of “local governments” shall be elected by “the people,” which 
incorporates by reference the eligibility requirements for voting under Article 
II, section 1, applying exclusively to “citizens.” Judge Wooten wrote that if 
noncitizens are allowed to vote, it stands to reason they could also run for 
mayor. He also stated that such a dramatic change should have been placed 
on the ballot for voters to decide.  
  
AROUND THE NATION 
  
Congressional Legislation: U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and 
Laphonza Butler (D-CA) have introduced the Redistricting Reform Act of 
2024. The bill establishes specific criteria that states must follow for 
congressional redistricting, including that states must ensure that districts 
comply with the U.S. Constitution and Voting Rights Act of 1965, are drawn to 
represent communities that share common interests, and are not drawn to 
disfavor or favor political parties. 
  
The bill prevents states from engaging in redistricting processes until after the 
next U.S. Census and bans mid-decade redistricting. It requires the 
development and adoption of a redistricting plan that takes public comments 
into consideration. The bill also creates judicial remedies for when a state fails 
to enact a final congressional redistricting plan 
  
Wisconsin: Governor Tony Evers has signed legislation for new redistricting 
maps in Wisconsin. In December, the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down 
the state’s maps and blocked them from use in future elections. The approved 
maps were proposed by Evers in January. Although there were statewide 
concerns about a provision in the bill that delays the implementation of the 
maps until November, the Legislative Reference Bureau has stated this 
provision was standard practice. The maps are expected to be implemented 
before the 2024 general election. 
  
Louisiana: Louisiana’s Republican Secretary of State and Attorney General 
have appealed a decision striking down the state’s legislative districts to the 
“notoriously conservative” 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The federal court 
judge had originally ruled that Louisiana’s state House and Senate maps 
violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The court gave Louisiana a 
“reasonable period of time” to draw maps that remedy the violations in time 
 
 
for the 2024 elections. State officials are now arguing that voters cannot sue 
to enforce Section 2. 


February 27 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
4-8-2024 
April 8 Roundtable Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
 
 
 
 
 
            N.Y. ELECTIONS, CENSUS & REDISTRICTING UPDATE 
LITIGATION  
  
Nassau County: Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman has filed a 
lawsuit against Governor Kathy Hochul and New York State, challenging a 
new law that will move most local elections from odd to even-numbered years 
in 2026. Blakeman alleges that the Even Year Election Law would conflict 
with the Nassau County Charter’s provisions, which prescribes the timing of 
elections and terms of office for county officials.  
  
Since the law would forcibly change the terms of Nassau County’s Charter, 
and thus would violate Nassau County’s “home rule powers,” Blakeman 
argues that this law violates Article IX of the New York State Constitution. 
According to Article IX, the state can only make changes to the affairs, 
government, or property of a local municipality by adhering to specific 
constitutional requirements. Blakeman argues that these requirements are not 
present.  
  
Legislators argue that local elections should coincide with federal and state 
elections when the voter turnout is the highest. Blakeman argues that voters 
will ignore local issues if county and town elections happen during the same 
cycle as federal and state contests. The New York State Association of 
Counties believes the new law will result in less attention to local issues and 
“curtails local home rule authority” because the law was not approved by local 
leaders or subject to public hearings.  
  
Last month, Onondaga County filed a similar lawsuit challenging the even-
year law. On Thursday, the Ways and Means Committee of the Suffolk 
County Legislature also approved a resolution that authorized the county 
attorney to challenge the even-year law.  
  
LEGISLATION 
  
New York State MENA Bill: State Senator Michael Gianaris and 
Assemblymember Jessica González-Rojas are calling for support of the 
MENA that would require every state agency, board, department, and 
commission that collects demographic data to disaggregate Middle Eastern 
and North African (MENA) communities from white demographics. 
Approximately 280,000 people live in MENA communities in New York, but 
the legislators argue that the actual figure is likely more than 500,000.  
  
 
 
Advocates believe that MENA communities are underserved in New York due 
to the communities’ needs being lumped in with the needs of white 
communities. MENA communities experience higher rates of health 
disparities, housing insecurity, language access needs, and poverty than 
white demographics. Businesses and organizations that serve MENA 
communities also struggle to obtain equity-based aid due to the incorrect 
classification.  
  
Last month, the Biden Administration approved a proposal to include “Middle 
Eastern or North African” as a response to race and ethnicity questions on 
future federal government forms. The MENA Bill would continue this 
sentiment into state-collected data.  
  
Campaign Finance Changes?: Senator James Skoufis is supporting 
legislation  
(S. 8969) to raise the threshold for campaign contributions to candidates 
needed to make them eligible for the state’s new matching funds 
program.  Skoufis has revised a bill vetoed by Governor Hochul last year that 
would have allowed the first $250 of contributions to be matchable by the 
state. 
 
The legislation would require Senate candidates to raise $24,000 from 350 in-
district donors. Currently, a candidate needs to raise $12,000 from 150 
donors.  
Assembly candidates would need to raise $10,000 from 145 in-district 
donors.  
The bill would also increase the number of donations necessary to meet the 
new  thresholds. 
  
AROUND THE NATION 
  
Washington: The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to reinstate a state 
legislative map in the Yakima Valley region. The lawsuit arose after the voting 
map was drawn by Washington’s Independent Redistricting Commission after 
the 2020 census was completed. The plaintiffs argued that the district violated 
the Voting Rights Act by diluting Hispanic voters’ ability to elect their preferred 
candidates. The majority of the district’s voting age population is Hispanic.  
  
In August, a federal judge ruled that there was evidence of significant past 
discrimination against Latinos in the Yakima Valley region, ongoing impacts of 
discrimination, racial appeals in campaigns, and a lack of responsiveness on 
the part of elected officials.  
  
Last month, the judge chose a map submitted by the plaintiffs after the 
Washington Legislature failed to require the commission to draw a new map. 
The new map redrew 13 of Washington’s 49 districts. A Republican lawmaker 
 
 
and two voters asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to pause 
the judge’s ruling while their appeal moved forward. 
  
When the court refused the request, they asked the Supreme Court to 
intervene. The emergency application noted that the percentage of Hispanic 
voters in the newly-approved district was slightly lower than in the one it 
challenged. The Supreme Court refused. 
  
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES 
  
NYC City Planning’s Population Division has a new Associate 
Demographic Scientist posting now open to applicants. This hire will help 
execute innovative strategies in the production of population estimates and 
projections for New York City, and assist in preparations for the 2030 Census. 
The successful candidate will also act as an in-house demographic and 
statistical consultant, advising City agencies and outside organizations on 
best practices in the application of data for policy formulation, program 
planning, and the distribution of resources. Qualified applicants should have 
an advanced degree in demography, or related field, and knowledge of 
census and survey methods, multivariate statistical analysis, and the 
evaluation of data validity and reliability. 
  
Here is a link to the Associate Demographic 
Scientist posting: https://www.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/about/e
mployment-opportunities/631074.pdf 
 


April 8 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
5-6-2024 
May 6 Roundtable Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. ELECTIONS, CENSUS & REDISTRICTING UPDATE 
REDISTRICTING LITIGATION 
 
NYC Council Challenge Appeal Heard: Desis Rising v. NYC 
Districting Commission 
 
On May 2, the Appellate Division (First Department) heard oral arguments in 
the case challenging the NYC Council districts. To recap, last year, Desis 
Rising Up & Moving (DRUM), a South Asian and Indo-Caribbean non-profit, 
filed this challenge alleging that the redistricting plan violated the NYC 
Charter by failing to ensure the fair and effective representation of the Indo-
Caribbean and Punjabi South Asian community in Richmond Hill and South 
Ozone Park. Last May, the trial court dismissed the challenge, finding that the 
petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Districting Commission violated the 
Charter. 
 
During oral arguments before the appellate division, the justices drilled down 
on the language of the charter and questioned whether adherence to the 
requirement of “ensuring fair and effective representation of racial and 
language minority groups” should be analyzed on a citywide scale, “in 
totality,” as one justice put it, based on how many majority Asian districts 
were created, for example, or if this factor is a “local inquiry” as attorney for 
the DRUM petitioners argued. 
 
Another justice pointed to expert Dr.  Lisa Handley’s report as the basis for 
the commission’s adherence to this factor. However, attorney for the 
petitioners contended that Dr. Handley’s analyses addressed the federal 
voting rights ac(VRA), not the charter. Furthermore, attorney for the 
petitioners argued that while the federal VRA ensures that minority groups are 
able to elect their candidates of choice, the framers of the charter chose a 
“different and broader approach”: ensuring “fair and effective representation.” 
Attorney for the petitioners asserted that “fair and effective representation” 
means “having a representative in city government who is going to be 
responsive to that groups’ concerns.” 
 
The attorney for the commission emphasized the incredibly complex nature of 
redistricting in NYC, the commission’s “unprecedented” public outreach 
specifically to minority communities, and the resulting 29 minority opportunity 
districts and an increase in the amount of Asian opportunity districts. The 
attorney for the commission also pointed to the language in the charter 
provision that states “such districting plan shall…” ensure “fair and effective 
representation” to support his assertion that this criterion is not a district-by-
 
 
district inquiry as the other side argued, it is a holistic analysis. In response, 
one justice questioned how we can then ensure representation for “folks of 
color in a particular area.” Another justice mentioned the alleged arbitrary 
division of a community and whether the map complies with the third charter 
criterion (keeping communities of interest intact) as opposed to the proposed 
Unity Map. The attorney for the commission noted the complicated task of 
keeping communities intact in Queens and pointed again to the commission’s 
extensive public outreach to these groups. He also emphasized that the 
commission stated on the record that it was concerned that the Unity Map 
would not provide sufficient opportunities for Asian voters to elect their 
candidates of choice. 
 
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT LITIGATION 
 
Nassau County Legislative Map Challenges 
 
Memos Supporting Non-Parties’ Motions to Quash Subpoenas 
 
Last week, Nassau filed two reply memos supporting non-parties Francis 
Moroney’s and Richard Nicolello’s motions to quash their subpoenas. The 
county argued that the subpoenas seek testimony that is protected by 
legislative privilege including how and why they formulated draft maps for the 
legislature to consider. The county argued that the plaintiffs seek to question 
former chairperson (Moroney) of the advisory commission—“a committee 
specifically designed to assist the Legislature in crafting legislation—about his 
conversations, conduct, intent, motivations, and knowledge regarding that 
crafting of proposed legislation. This aims directly at the heart of legislative 
independence that the privilege is designed to protect, and will directly 
‘impede legislative action’ moving forward.” 
 
Regarding former Presiding Officer of the Legislature Nicolello, the county 
asserted that the plaintiffs “seek to question [him] about his conversations, 
conduct, intent, and knowledge undergirding the crafting of proposed 
legislation. That aims at the core of what legislative independence was 
designed to protect against, directly ‘impeding legislative action’ moving 
forward.” Additionally, the county reiterated Nicolello’s argument that the 
subpoena seeks testimony that is protected by attorney-client privilege 
including communications with law firm Troutman Pepper during the 
redistricting process. 
 
Letter to the Court on Discovery Dispute 
 
In response to the plaintiffs’ letter to the court about the discovery dispute 
regarding Dr. Sean Trende, the county wrote to the court requesting that the 
court not rule on any issues raised by the plaintiffs until after Trende has been 
able to appear and file his motion to quash the subpoena. The county 
 
 
contended that “Dr. Trende will sit for a deposition as an expert witness at the 
appropriate time; this is not an effort to avoid a deposition of Dr. Trende 
altogether.” 
 
Newburgh: Oral Clarke et al v. Town of Newburgh 
 
On April 30, N.Y. State Attorney General  Letitia James filed a memo 
supporting her request to participate in the case as amicus curiae in 
opposition to Newburgh’s motion to dismiss. The Attorney General explained 
that this case presents an important question related to the NYVRA that has 
never been addressed: whether a town or other political subdivision may 
receive the benefit of a 90-day protection from litigation (“safe harbor”) when it 
does not “meaningfully commit” to enacting a remedy during the 90-day 
period, but instead only commits to consider the issue further. The Attorney 
General emphasized that if the court were to answer “yes” to this question, “it 
would undermine the text and purposes of the NYVRA, enable delay of 
judicial remedies, and increase the risk of elections proceeding under 
unlawful conditions.” 
 
On May 1, Newburgh submitted a reply memo supporting its motion to 
dismiss the case. Newburgh argued that the plaintiffs filed their challenge in 
violation of the NYVRA’s 90-day safe harbor provision as the town board 
passed the required resolution within the prescribed time period and included 
the necessary elements in that resolution (intention to implement a remedy for 
a potential violation of the NYVRA; specific steps the town will take to 
implement such remedy; and a schedule for implementing a remedy). While 
the plaintiffs argued that the town’s resolution was insufficient because it 
doesn’t declare the town’s intention to implement a remedy, Newburgh 
contended that the resolution complies with the NYVRA’s requirements by 
explicitly stating that the town board “’intends to proactively review the town’s 
current at-large election system…and implement remedies for any potential 
violation of the NYVRA that may exist,’” and “’affirming that the town intends 
to enact and implement the appropriate remedies’ if ‘the town board 
concludes that there may be a violation of the NYVRA.’” Newburgh further 
asserted that the plaintiffs’ argument that the NYVRA requires the town to 
“pre-commit” to enacting a remedy to an alleged violation, even before the 
town has determined whether the allegations have merit, is unreasonable. 
  
ELECTION LAW LITIGATION 
  
Even Year Election Law Challenges: In December 2023, Governor Kathy 
Hochul approved legislation that moved most  county and town elections from 
odd- to even-numbered years. The goal was to improve voter turnout by 
holding more even-year elections when voter turnout is statistically much 
higher. Six counties have now filed lawsuits against the state to block the law, 
 
 
including Onondaga, Nassau, Oneida, Rensselaer, Dutchess, and Rockland 
Counties.  
  
The counties all argue the new law violates Article IX of the N.Y.S. 
Constitution, which gives local governments the authority to determine when 
local elections are held. Each challenge asserts that the Legislature exceeded 
its authority to “meddle” in local government affairs since the even year 
election law was neither a general or special law.  
  
Onondaga and Oneida counties argue that a clause in Article IX protects all 
local laws passed before 1963, and the counties’ charters (both passed in 
1961) scheduled local elections for odd-numbered years. Nassau County 
claims its local election years were established by a charter and referendum 
in 1936, so the county can only change its election years via a similar 
process. 
  
Despite several nuances in the arguments, Onondaga and Nassau Counties 
may consolidate their cases. There is also a strong possibility that all six 
counties will consolidate their lawsuits into a singular case against the state. 
New York has not yet responded to any of these lawsuits. 
  
CENSUS 
U.S. House To Vote on Bill to Add Census Citizenship 
Question & Adjust Reapportionment 
  
The U.S. House Oversight and Accountability Committee recently 
approved H.R. 7109, a bill to add a citizenship question to the decennial 
census and exclude noncitizens from the count used for congressional 
apportionment. It would also make it possible for states to redistrict based on 
either citizen or citizen voting age populations (and thereby excluding large 
populations, such as non-citizen Hispanic residents). 
  
The bill will be considered by the full House for a vote on Thursday, May 9th. 
  
While it is permissible to ask a citizenship question on the census form, it is 
likely unconstitutional to exclude non-citizens from the census count for 
congressional reapportionment purposes. Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. 
Constitution requires that the reapportionment of districts among the states be 
based on the whole count of all persons residing in the country. This bill has 
the potential impact of costing New York the loss of congressional districts 
after the 2030 census. Two New York Members of Congress are bill co-
sponsors (Congress Members Nicholas Langworthy and Anthony D’Esposito. 
  
Dr. Andrew Beveridge at Social Explorer has developed a website providing 
information on the impact switching to citizen-based redistricting would have 
 
 
for congressional and state legislative districts in every state.  Link to this tool 
here: https://www.socialexplorer.com/evenwel/ 
  
While New York could potentially lose congressional districts if this bill 
becomes law, the state constitution requires that districts within the state be 
based on the total number of residents (including non-citizens). New York 
State ended the practice of drawing districts based on citizenship in 1969. 
  
According to Dr.Beveridge,  if this bill had been enacted into law in 2020 and 
assuming that the American Community Survey was a good representation of 
citizens from 2018 to 2022, California would lose three congressional seats, 
Florida would lose one and Texas would lose one while Ohio, Pennsylvania, 
Idaho, Michigan and West Virginia, would each win a seat.   
  
Based on preliminary calculations, Dr. Beveridge also found that   by 
switching to either citizens or citizens of voting age (CVAP) as the redistricting 
denominator, there "would (be) a substantial effect on redistricting for 
Congress.  Put simply the Democrats would on average need to add over 
17,000 citizens or over 14,000 citizens of voting age to balance their 
congressional districts, meanwhile the Republicans would need to reduce the 
size of their districts by over 15,000 on average for citizens and over 13,000 
for citizens of voting age." 
  
REDISTRICTING AROUND THE NATION 
  
Louisiana: Black voters and civil rights groups have asked the U.S. Supreme 
Court to review a decision made by a federal 3-judge panel that struck down 
Louisiana’s new congressional map, ruling the map was an unconstitutional 
gerrymander.  
  
Last year, Louisiana was ordered to enact a congressional map with two 
majority-Black districts after the courts found that the original map violated 
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. In January, Louisiana enacted a new 
congressional map that met the court’s requirements. A lawsuit was filed by 
“non African-American voters” (as the voters self-identified) in response. 
  
The lawsuit aimed to block the new map, alleging that the map was a racial 
gerrymander. After a trial in mid-April, the federal 3-judge panel found that the 
new districts—aimed at better representing the state’s Black population—
were racially gerrymandered. The panel blocked the map from use in the 
2024 elections.  
  
The notice of appeal lists numerous reasons why the Court should review the 
case. Black voters and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund argue the federal 
panel did not follow the proper procedure and heard the case without any 
input from the Black voters who originally challenged Louisiana’s 
 
 
congressional map. While the parties await the Supreme Court’s decision to 
review, the state must enact a new map by May 15. 
 
EVENTS 
  
June 18- New York Law School will host a conference on redistricting from 
9:30 to Noon at the school. Panels will focus on the 2014 constitutional 
amendment, the post-2020 process and what happened, and next steps for a 
new constitutional amendment before the post-2030 process gets underway. 
More information will be provided in future updates. 


New York Law School

Not a member yet