New York Law School’s Digital Commons@NYLS

OCTOBER 2, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/innovation_law_tech_events_flyers/1014/thumbnail.jp

Innovation Center for Law and Technology

LegalTech Talks | Transitioning From Practice to Legal Tech

Teitel, Ruti G.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Other Publications Faculty Scholarship 
12-31-2024 
MAGA Goes to Panama 
Ruti G. Teitel 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_other_pubs 
MAGA Goes to Panama
Dec 31, 2024 |RUTI TEITEL
NEW YORK – US President-elect Donald Trump clearly does not intend to
pursue a “good neighbor” policy. He has been mocking Canadian Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau by calling him ‘governor’ while proclaiming that a country of 40
million people should become the 51st US state. His first telephone conversation
with Mexico’s new president, Claudia Scheinbaum, had to be followed by
Scheinbaum politely saying that she had agreed to none of the terms Trump
claimed that she had.
Now Trump is seeking to reopen a debate over control of the Panama Canal that
was settled five decades ago. But here, Trump’s statements resonate with a
powerful sentiment that long underpinned previous US policy on the issue. After
all, the Panama Canal was an American idea, the brainchild of Teddy Roosevelt
at the start of the twentieth century – and the US has had difficulty letting go of
it ever since.
Some 5% of all world trade in goods, and 40% of US container traffic, passes
through the Panama Canal. Connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans via a 51-
mile (82-kilometer) waterway across the Isthmus of Panama, the canal has
become entangled in the intensifying geopolitical and geoeconomic rivalry
between the United States and China. Trump’s statements about the US retaking
the canal in the face of alleged increased Chinese influence in Panama have
shocked many – not least Panamanians, who see them as an affront to their
sovereignty.
But sovereignty has been a pliable concept throughout Panama’s history.
Contending with the vestiges of the Spanish empire in the Americas, Roosevelt
thought it crucial to establish a route for US trade between the Atlantic and the
Pacific that avoided the need to circumnavigate South America. There were two
options: Nicaragua and Colombia. The latter proved easier but involved some
US sleight of hand.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter, PS Politics
Go beyond the headlines to understand the issues, forces, and trends shaping the
US presidential election – and the likely implications of its outcome.
your@email.com
By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.
Make your inbox smarter.
Select Newsletters
Roosevelt’s administration backed a faction that pursued secession from
Colombia, which led to the creation of the new state of Panama, where the US
could pursue Roosevelt’s pet project. In 1903, the US received authority to build
a canal and control of the Panama Canal Zone “in perpetuity,” in exchange for
annual payments to Panama.
More than a strategic trade route was at stake in seizing Panama and building the
canal. In a letter to Sir George Otto Trevelyan, Roosevelt wrote: “Wherever I
could establish a precedent for strength in the executive, as I did in…taking
Panama…I have felt not merely that my action was right in itself, but that in
showing the strength of, or in giving strength to the executive, I was establishing
a precedent of value.”
In his memoirs, Roosevelt conceded his “regret” for using force in violating
Colombia’s sovereignty, but the US never issued a formal apology or offered
compensation. The 1914 version of the Thomson-Urrutia Treaty between the US
and Colombia conveyed the US side’s “sincere regret that anything should have
occurred to interrupt or to mar relations” with Colombia. But Roosevelt’s
continued opposition to such official statements, bolstered by US officials like
Secretary of State John Hay (who supported the former president’s actions in
Panama), delayed the treaty’s ratification. Only in 1921, when the offending
passage was removed, did the Senate ratify the treaty, which offered reparations
but no apology or explicit admission of wrongdoing.
Tensions over the Canal Zone continued to simmer for decades. By the 1960s,
growing resentment of US power in Latin America culminated in Panama’s brief
suspension of diplomatic relations in 1964.
From that time on, the issue preoccupied more than one US administration. In
1964, after consulting with former Presidents Harry Truman and Dwight
Eisenhower, President Lyndon Johnson committed to work toward a new
arrangement with Panama. It would take 14 years of bipartisan negotiation under
two Democratic presidents and two Republican presidents before an agreement
was reached. Ultimately, it was Jimmy Carter who decided that it was time to
Sign up
turn over the canal to Panama and correct injustices toward the region. In a
nationally televised address, Carter told Americans that:
“The most important reason – the only reason – to ratify the treaties is that they
are in the highest national interest of the United States and will strengthen our
position in the world. Our security interests will be stronger. Our trade
opportunities will be improved. We will demonstrate that as a large and powerful
country, we are able to deal fairly and honorably with a proud but smaller
sovereign nation.”
Even with Carter pushing for ratification, it would take months of effort to
overcome opposition among the American public and in Congress. Finally, in
1977, the US reached an agreement with Panamanian General Omar Torrijos to
transfer control of the waterway.
But there was some important fine print. One of the two treaties that the
countries signed specified that the US remained in control of the canal’s security
and could use military force to defend it against any threat to neutrality. In fact,
the US retained the right to defend the canal forever. The treaties provided that
the Canal Zone would be turned over to Panama in 1979, and transfer of the
operation of the canal would be complete by 1999. A year later, the Senate
ratified the Torrijos-Carter Treaties by a narrow margin, and the US continued to
operate the canal until December 1999.
Seen in the light of this history, Trump’s recent statements may be shocking, but
they are not surprising. As Trump contemplates his next move on the Panama
Canal, the question we should be asking is whether America ever became truly
reconciled to giving it up.
RUTI TEITEL
Ruti Teitel is Professor of Comparative Law at New York Law School and the
author of the forthcoming book Presidential Visions of Transitional Justice
(Oxford University Press, 2025).
https://prosyn.org/dM4S3yi
 
Support Project Syndicate


MAGA Goes to Panama

Wice, Jeffrey M.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
1-16-2024 
January 16 Roundtable Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
New York Law School, jeffrey.wice@nyls.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
Recommended Citation 
Wice, Jeffrey M., "January 16 Roundtable Update" (2024). Redistricting Roundtable Updates. 126. 
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates/126 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the NY Census and Redistricting Institute at 
DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Redistricting Roundtable Updates by an authorized 
administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, 
farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. CENSUS & REDISTRICTING ROUNDTABLE UPDATE 
 
LITIGATION 
 
In First NYVRA Lawsuit, Hispanic Voters Challenge Town’s 
At-Large Election System: Sergio Serratto et al v. Town of 
Mount Pleasant et al 
 
On January 9, in Westchester County State Supreme Court, five members of 
the Town of Mount Pleasant’s Hispanic community filed a lawsuit under the 
NYVRA. They seek to remedy the “situation in which they are unable to elect 
candidates of their choice and denied an equal opportunity to elect 
candidates of their choice compared to the white majority because voting in 
the Town is racially polarized, preventing Hispanic candidates from being 
elected to the Town Board.” 
 
They assert that the Town’s use of an at-large method of election, where all 
voters elect the Town Supervisor and all four Town Board members, violates 
the NYVRA’s prohibition against vote dilution and voter suppression based on 
a totality of the circumstances analysis and by reason of racially polarized 
voting. 
 
This legal action follows a process outlined in the NYVRA where prospective 
plaintiffs must first notify the town or other political subdivision of a potential 
NYVRA violation. According to the complaint, in accordance with the 
NYVRA’s requirements, before commencing this action, the challengers sent 
a notification letter to the clerk of the Town, asserting that the Town may be in 
violation of the NYVRA. The Town then resolved to “proactively review its 
current at-large system” and hired experts Jeffrey M. Wice and Dr. Lisa 
Handley to investigate the claim and assist the Town in complying with the 
law. Wice and Handley reported findings of racially polarized voting, and the 
challengers contend that these findings are ”highly probative evidence of 
impermissible vote dilution.” The Town then held public hearings to consider 
procedures for remedying the violation. The complaint notes that at the 
hearings, many of the Town’s white residents expressed their opposition to 
taking any remedial action, encouraged the Town to “fight the claims,” and 
“often made racially charged comments.” Because more than 90 days have 
elapsed since the Town passed its resolution, and no remedy has been 
enacted or implemented, the challengers assert they are now permitted to 
commence this action under the NYVRA. 
 
The complaint alleges three causes of action in violation of the NYVRA: (1) 
 
 
voter suppression; (2) vote dilution by reason of racially polarized voting; and 
(3) vote dilution under the totality of the circumstances. 
 
They maintain that the Town’s at-large election system violates the NYVRA 
because for many years the system has “prevented members of the Town’s 
minority Hispanic community from electing any candidates of their choice to 
the Mount Pleasant Town Board, thus denying the members of that 
community their most basic rights.” The complaint notes that the Town’s 
population has risen drastically in recent decades, largely attributed to the 
rapidly expanding Hispanic community. The Hispanic community now 
constitutes about 19% of the Town’s overall population, most notably in the 
Village of Sleepy Hollow with 47% Hispanic population. 
 
Despite this, the complaint notes, every person ever elected to the Town 
Board has been white. The challengers contend that this reality is due to the 
Town’s at-large election system combined with the Town’s racial and ethnic 
polarization where Hispanic voters and white voters consistently support 
different candidates and those supported by white voters usually win because 
white voters make up a majority of the electorate. This system prevents 
Hispanic voters from having the opportunity to elect candidates of their 
choice. The challengers also note that there has not been a candidate of color 
for Town Board since 2003 “because the at-large election system has created 
an environment in which the Hispanic community has lost hope that it will 
ever have a voice in Town government.” 
 
Moreover, the complaint emphasizes that because this community lacks 
representation on the Town Board, they have been “demoted to second class 
citizens.” They point to several issues to demonstrate this point, including the 
Town Board frequently neglecting the community’s interests, opposing 
affordable housing projects, and declaring a state of emergency to prevent 
Hispanic migrants from taking asylum in the Town. 
 
The challengers contend that the NYVRA requires the Town’s at-large 
election system be swiftly changed to remedy this unequal treatment of the 
Hispanic community in Mount Pleasant. They assert that there are several 
effective remedies, including drawing single-member districts or instituting a 
modified at-large system. They ask the court to declare that this use of an at-
large system violates the NYVRA and to order the Town to implement a new 
method of election “that includes either a districting plan or an alternative 
method of election for the 2025 Town election that remedies the Town’s 
violation of NYVRA.” 
 
ELECTION LAW LEGISLATION 
 
Doctor John L. Flateau Voting and Elections Database and 
 
 
Academic Center of New York Act (S657A, Myrie) 
 
On January 8, The New York State Senate passed a bill intended to regulate 
public data maintained by county and city boards of elections and establish 
the New York voting and elections academic center to maintain a statewide 
database of voting and election data. 
The bill’s sponsor, Senator Zellnor Myrie (D-Kings) renamed the bill in 
memory of Dr. John L. Flateau, a veteran voting rights and redistricting 
expert. Dr. Flateau passed away on December 30th. 
 
The New York Voting and Elections Database 
 
The database would serve as a central repository of certain elections and 
voting data available to the public from an election authority in the state. The 
state board of elections (BOE) would be required to collect, host, and 
maintain these electronic records for at least 12 years. 
 
After every election in the state, each election authority would be required to 
transmit to the state BOE copies of: 
1. Election results at the election district level for every statewide election 
and every election in every political subdivision (city, town, etc.) 
2. Voter registration lists 
3. Voter history files 
4. Maps or other documentation of the configuration of districts 
5. Tabulations of the number of valid and invalid affidavit ballots, the 
reason for which the ballots were invalid, and the quantity and 
disposition of ballots subject to the cure procedure 
6. Lists of election day poll sites and early voting sites and maps or other 
documentation of the configuration of districts 
7. Adopted districting or redistricting plans 
8. Any other publicly available data as requested by the state BOE 
The bill would require the database to post the above records to its public 
facing website (except individual voter registration records which would only 
be made available to the public upon request free of charge). 
 
The New York Voting and Elections Academic Center would be given full 
access to the database. 
 
The New York Voting and Elections Academic Center 
 
The act would also establish the New York Voting and Elections Academic 
Center jointly within the State University of New York (SUNY) and the City 
 
 
University of New York (CUNY) “to foster, pursue, and sponsor research on 
existing laws and best practices in voting and elections.” 
 
The Center would be required to provide a center for research, and research 
methodologies for election and demographic data and would be empowered 
to: 
1. Conduct classes 
2. Organize interdisciplinary groups of scholars to research voting and 
elections in the state 
3. Conduct seminars involving voting and elections 
4. Assist in the dissemination of data from the database to the public 
5. Publish such books and periodicals as it shall deem appropriate on 
voting and elections in the state 
6. Provide nonpartisan technical assistance to political subdivisions, 
scholars, and the general public seeking to use the resources of the 
database 
The Center would also be required to maintain the following electronic data 
and records and make them available to the public at no cost: 
1. Estimates of the total population, voting age population, and citizen 
voting age population by race, color, and language-minority group, 
broken down to the election district level for every political subdivision 
in the state… 
2. Estimates of voter turnout by race or Hispanic origin… 
3. Estimates of citizens of voting age who speak a language other than 
English and are limited English proficient… 
4. Any other estimates or analytical data that a director deems advisable. 
5. Any other estimates requested by the state BOE or office of the 
attorney general. 
The co-directors of the Center would also be required to publish a list of each 
board of elections or political subdivision that is required to provide language-
related assistance in voting and elections along with which languages they 
must provide. The bill states that the attorney general would then adopt each 
such list and provide the information to each relevant board of elections or 
political subdivision. 
Much of the redistricting related material has already been collected by New 
York  Law School’s N.Y. Census & Redistricting Institute. The Institute hopes 
to collaborate with the new Center if the legislation is enacted into the law. 
REDISTRICTING 
Revised Broome County Legislative Map Approved 
 
 
Broome County Executive James Garnar approved county legislation that 
revised the county’s 2021 county legislative map. The previous map had been 
invalidated by the state courts for violations of the state’s new Municipal 
Home Rule Act provisions limiting town splits. The map was approved despite 
major public criticism of the map at a public hearing last week over the map’s 
alleged partisan favoritism and lack of compact districts. 


English

January 16 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
1-2-2024 
January 2 Roundtable Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
New York Law School, jeffrey.wice@nyls.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
Recommended Citation 
Wice, Jeffrey M., "January 2 Roundtable Update" (2024). Redistricting Roundtable Updates. 128. 
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates/128 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the NY Census and Redistricting Institute at 
DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Redistricting Roundtable Updates by an authorized 
administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, 
farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
 
 
 
 
 
N.Y. CENSUS & REDISTRICTING ROUNDTABLE 
UPDATE 
  
    This Week’s Update Is Dedicated In Memory of Dr. John L. Flateau 
                                            (see remembrance below) 
  
REAPPORTIONMENT 
  
New York Projected to Lose Three Congressional Districts 
After 2030 
  
Based on new state population estimates released by the Census Bureau on 
December 19, New York is on the path to lose three congressional districts 
after the 2030 census is taken. Using the new estimates, a new congressional 
reapportionment this year would result in one additional district to Arizona, 
Florida, and Idaho. New York, Illinois, Minnesota would each lose an 
additional district and California would lose two more districts from what they 
lost when the official reapportionment was announced on  April 26, 2021.  
  
These new numbers reflect 2023 population estimates and are NOT projected 
forward to 2030. 
  
New York would lose an additional district if the 2023 population estimates 
were used for the apportionment last year in 2022.  New York lost only one 
district in the official reapportionment, going from 27 seats to 26 districts, 
losing that one district by just 89 people. The new population estimates drop 
the state to 25 seats, with the final district (#437) being missed by 118,581 
people.  
  
However, projects based on trends leading to 2030 indicate that New York is 
trending toward a three-district loss after 2030. In all, thirteen districts would 
change states by the end of the decade, with eight states gaining and and 
seven states losing districts. 
  
States gaining districts include: Arizona, Idaho, North Carolina, Tennessee, 
Utah (+1 each), Florida (+3), Texas (+4)  and state losing districts include: 
California (-4), Illinois (-2), Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Rhode 
Island (-1 each), Illinois (-2), and New York (-3). 
  
These estimates were prepared by Election Data Services, Inc. To read the 
full report, see: https://bit.ly/3RA8mOG 
  
 
 
New York last lost three districts after the 1990 census. In 2000 and 2010, 
New York last two districts each decade and only one district after 2020. After 
1980, New York lost a national record of five districts. During the 1940s, the 
state had 45 districts. It is now down to the number of districts held during the 
1920s at 26 districts. 
  
Commentary by Jim Brennan: Democrats Can Avoid a 
Second Debacle and Win on the Existing Lines 
  
From former Assemblyman Jim Brennan: “Changing the Congressional 
district lines again to gain partisan advantage might sound appealing, but the 
Democrats would be smart to just stand their ground and fight it out on the 
existing lines, rather than risk what happened in 2022 happening again. 
  
“In fact, the Democrats have strong chances to win back these districts and 
avoid the political and legal thicket associated with the Legislature drawing 
lines to favor the Democrats, even if Congressional primaries get delayed 
until August. The Democrats could just decide to stand their ground on the 
existing Congressional lines and just go all out to win the districts. An analysis 
of the vote in the 2022 midterms in the competitive districts in New 
York…showed poor turnout among Democrats to be a major factor in their 
losses “ 
  
Read the entire column here: bit.ly/3vnOmYb 
LITIGATION 
 
N.Y. Early Voting Law Challenge: Stefanik v. Hochul – GOP 
Request for Preliminary Injunction Denied 
 
In September 2023, a group of Republican plaintiffs (including organizations 
and elected officials) filed suit in Albany County State Supreme Court 
seeking to invalidate the New York Early Mail Voter Act (EMVA) as 
unconstitutional and seeking to block the implementation of the law. 
 
On December 26, 2023, the court denied the plaintiffs’ request for a 
preliminary injunction, agreeing with the defendants and intervenors that the 
plaintiffs failed to establish the requisite irreparable harm and that the balance 
of the equities weigh in their favor. 
 
The plaintiffs had asked the court to issue a preliminary injunction so that the 
EMVA would be temporarily prevented from being implemented until the court 
makes its final decision. As the court wrote in its December 26 decision, to 
secure a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs must show “(1) a probability of 
success on the merits, (2) danger of irreparable injury in the absence of an 
 
 
injunction and (3) a balance of equities in [their] favor.” The court further 
explained that the second element is only established where plaintiffs 
successfully show a danger of “‘injury that is neither remote nor speculative, 
but actual and imminent.’” 
 
On the second element, irreparable harm, the plaintiffs argued “in conclusory 
fashion” that early voting by mail will result in more votes cast for the 
defendants than for the plaintiffs. The court held that this belief is insufficient 
to grant a preliminary injunction, and that the plaintiffs fail to establish this 
element because they cannot show that they will suffer electoral 
disadvantages based on the EMVA. 
 
On element three, the court found that because the EMVA has yet to be 
declared unconstitutional, the balances do not tip in the plaintiffs’ favor as 
enjoining the EMVA at this point would harm NY voters. 
 
The plaintiffs immediately appealed this decision to the Appellate Division, 
Third Judicial Department. 
STATE ELECTION LAW  
  
State Senators Ask State Elections Board to Ban Trump From 
Ballot 
  
A group of state senators recently asked the New York State Board of 
Elections to remove Donald Trump from the state’s primary ballot for the 
same reason he was removed in Colorado and Maine. Click here to read 
the letter. 
  
Governor Approves Bill to Align Local Elections to Even 
Years 
  
Govenor Hochul approved legislation to move most local elections (outside 
New York City)  from odd years to even years, aligning them with other 
federal and state election cycles. The legislation was enacted in an effort to 
increase voter turnout and to  save taxpayer money. Local government 
groups opposed the measure, arguing that it would focus less attention on 
local issues. Republicans opposed the legislation because they saw it as an 
attempt to bolster Democratic candidates in even year elections when 
Democratic turnout is higher for Presidential and other major races. The 
Governor also indicated her support for a constitutional amendment to align 
all local elections to the even year cycle. 
  
The new law does not apply to elections for mayor, district attorneys, judges, 
local school boards, and fire districts.  
 
 
  
Governor Vetoes Campaign Finance Bill 
  
Governor Hochul vetoed legislation that would have expanded campaign 
contributions that would be eligible for public matching funds beginning in the 
2024 elections. The rejected legislation would have permitted the first $250 of 
campaign contributions to be matched by the state. Current law only allows 
matching funds for donors who contributed no more than $250 in any one 
election cycle. The legislation would have permitted larger contributions from 
wealthy donors.  
  
CENSUS NEWS 
 
Lawmakers Propose Commission to Study Population 
Migration Losses   
In response to New York’s population decline estimates two state legislators 
want the state to look into why the state is losing so many people. this trend. 
New York, among eight states experiencing a drop in population, lost over 
101,000 residents, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. 
Senator Jim Tedisco (R) and Assemblyman Angelo Santabarbara (D) are 
introducing legislation to create a state commission to look into the causes of 
out-migration. The proposed commission would include 13 members 
appointed by various state leaders and conduct public hearings across the 
state. 
IN MEMORIUM 
John Flateau: Election and Redistricting Pioneer Passes 
 New York and the nation lost a voting rights pioneer and leader last week. 
Dr. John L. Flatueau, a professor at CUNY’s Medgar Evers College, passed 
away suddenly on December 30th. He had a long and distinguished career in 
New York’s academic, government, and political worlds. 
Dr. Flateau chaired CUNY’s Medgar Evers College Public Administration 
department, directed the Dubois Bunche Center for Public Policy, and served 
for a period as dean of the college’s School of Business and Office of 
External Relations  
Perhaps most notably, Dr. Flateau was the lead plaintiff in a landmark 1982 
federal court case that successfully challenged New York’s delay in 
redistricting the state legislature. As a result of the 1980 Census, New York 
State had lost five congressional districts. In Flateau v. Anderson, John and a 
group of plaitiffs charged that the state legislative lines enacted in the 1970s 
needed to be redrawn before the 1982 elections (and not six years later, as 
the then Republican state senate leadership insisted was permissible under 
state law). In Flateau, the court ordered the state legislature to redraw both 
 
 
the state’s congressional and state legislative district lines in a timely manner 
in 1982. 
  
Dr. Flateau continued to provide key leadership on census and redistricting 
issues.  He was a member of the New York City Districting Commission in 
2002-2003 and then its Executive Director in 2022-2023.  Most recently, 
Flateau was a member of New York State’s Independent Redistricting 
Commission. He participated in a Commission meeting just last Thursday. 
Over his career, Dr. Flateau served in numerous other government positions. 
Among his roles, he was a member of the New York City Board of Elections, 
State Senate Deputy Secretary for Intergovernmental Relations, Chief of Staff 
to Mayor David N. Dinkins, Senior Vice President and Chief Diversity Officer 
for the NYS Empire State Development Corporation, and Executive Director 
of the NYS Black and Puerto Rican Legislative Caucus. He was active in local 
politics and managed several campaigns. 
Dr. Flateau was a graduate of New York University (BA) and the CUNY 
Graduate Center (MA and Phd). John is survived by his wife Lorraine sons 
Marcus and Jonathan. 
John Flateau was a prolific leader, mentor, and dedicated public servant. His 
mentorship of so many students and government workers became legend. 
Dedicated to a complete census count and fair redistricting,  
John’s imprint on New York will endure. And he will be missed by so many. 
As a memorial notice by Medgar Evers College read, “May Dr. Flateau 
forever rest in power.” 
------------------------------------------------- 
Funeral services will be held at 10:00 AM on Wednesday, January 10th at the 
Bridge St. AWME Church, 277 Stuyvesant Avenue in Brooklyn, NY. 


January 2 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
1-29-2024 
January 29 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 
  
Dennis Walcott Appointed to State Independent Redistricting 
Commission 
  
Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart Cousins has appointed Queens 
Public Library President & CEO Dennis Walcott to serve on the Independent 
Redistricting Commission (IRC), succeeding Dr. John Flateau who passed 
away last month. Walcott chaired the 2022-2023 New York City Districting 
Commission and was widely praised in his role  leading  the commission 
through its process to develop a new 51 district  city council map.  
 
Why Aren’t State Senate Districts Being Redrawn? 
 
While a new congressional map is expected fo this year’s congressional 
elections (and to be used through the 2030 elections), it’s often asked why 
the state senate map isn’t also being redrawn. Last year, 
the Nichols Assembly challenge resulted in a commission drawn map largely 
approved by the legislature.  
  
However, the state senate map drawn by the state court in the Steuben 
County-based Harkenrider case remains in place. There is no litigation 
pending seeking to have the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) 
draw a new Senate map to submit to the legislature. 
  
The original petition in Hoffmann v. Independent Redistricting Commission 
(IRC) sought to compel the IRC to submit to the legislature a second plan 
(or set of plans) for the congressional districts and the state legislative 
districts (State Senate and State Assembly). However, less than a 
month later, the petitioners asked the court to allow them to amend their 
petition to remove the state legislative districts. In their 
request, the Hoffman plaintiffs explained that in addition to having a particular 
interest in their congressional districts, they also understood that the Nichols 
v. Hochul Assembly remapping litigation was underway and could result in an 
order requiring the IRC to comply with its constitutional redistricting duties as 
to the State Assembly districts. Theyreasoned that removing the state 
legislative districts from their petition would “avoid the possibility of duplicative 
and conflicting proceedings in different courts.” 
  
 
 
Last month, the state Court of Appeals held in the Hoffmann appeal that 
“because the 2014 constitutional amendments limited court-ordered districts 
to only what is required to remedy a violation of law, Harkenrider cannot be 
read to hold that courts may create decade-long redistrictings or that we 
ordered Supreme Court to do so. Accordingly, the existing judicially drawn 
congressional districts (were)  limited to the 2022 election.” The court 
subsequently directed the IRC a new congressional map by February 2ith 
to  comply with its constitutional mandate. 
  
As things stand now, we can expect congressional and assembly elections to 
be run on maps enacted by the legislature and the senate election based on 
the court drawn map used in 2022. Unless the IRC takes the unlikely step to 
redraw the senate map on its own, a new lawsuit would need to be filed to 
compel the IRC and legislature to draw a new senate map. Since petitioning 
for senate (and all other offices) is set to begin on February 27, it is unlikely 
any new senate remapping would go into effect until the 2026 election cycle. 
  
LITIGATION 
  
Nassau County Legislative Map Challenge 
  
Coads et al v. Nassau County- Attorneys for Nassau County have asked the 
court to stay (or suspend) discovery until the court can rule on a motion to 
dismiss the challenge to the county’s legislative map. In their filing, county 
attorneys argue that “(per) the parties’ stipulation entered on January 19, 
2024, the deadline for the County and Legislature’s response to Plaintiffs’ 
discovery demands is February 2, 2024. Failing to temporarily stay discovery 
may cause discovery to come due during briefing of the motion, thus mooting 
the motion. 
  
AROUND THE NATION 
  
Wisconsin: the Wisconsin Supreme Court found the state’s redistricting 
maps as unconstitutional and set a February 1st deadline to draw and pass 
new maps. Governor Tony Evers promised to veto a redistricting map 
proposal that the Assembly passed last Wednesday because this map would 
reduce the number of GOP incumbents who would be paired. The vote on the 
remedial maps was 63-35, with all Republicans in support and all Democrats 
against. This veto will pass the power to the Wisconsin Supreme Court to 
install new redistricting maps. The Court will now review six submitted maps, 
of which Democrats would fare better than with the Assembly’s maps. 
Republicans currently have a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate and a 64-35 
majority in the Assembly under maps drawn in 2011. 
  
Florida: On January 24th , the Florida Supreme Court voted 6-0 to take up a 
challenge to the constitutionality of a congressional redistricting plan. The 
 
 
case centers on a North Florida district, Congressional District 5 (CD-5), 
which was overhauled during an April 2022 special legislative session. The 
plaintiffs argue the overhaul violated the 2010 Fair Districts Amendment, 
which barred drawing districts that would “diminish” the ability of minorities to 
“elect representatives of their choice.”  
  
A Leon County circuit judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the 1st District 
Court of Appeals overturned that decision and ruled in favor of the state. The 
plaintiffs argued that the court’s decision violated Supreme Court precedents 
in redistricting cases, including a case that led to the former design of CD-5. A 
separate challenge to the redistricting plan is pending in federal court and 
involves federal constitutional issues. The state case will likely not be 
resolved before candidate-qualifying deadlines and could remain in effect for 
the November congressional elections. 
  
Michigan: The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a request from the state’s 
Redistricting Commission to overrule an order to redraw 13 Detroit-area seats 
in the legislature. The commission challenged a December ruling by a federal 
appeals court panel that found Michigan’s 2021 redistricting maps were 
illegally influenced by race. Although nearly 80% of Detroit residents are 
black, the black voting population in the 13 districts range from 35% to 45%, 
with one district being as low as 19%. The 2022 midterms—the first election 
after the new redistricting maps—left Detroit without black representation in 
Congress for the first time since the early 1950s. 
  
The panel ordered Michigan to redraw 7 state House districts for the 2024 
election, with a later deadline for 6 state Senate districts because the 
senators’ terms do not expire until 2026. A drafted state House map is due by 
February 2, and the final deadline is March 29th. 


January 29 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
2-5-2024 
February 5 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 
 
Plattsburgh Delays City Redistricting 
  
Plattsburgh’s Common Council was set to vote on new boundaries for 
the city’s ward districts on February 1st. Plattsburgh’s city charter mandates 
the formation of a commission to review and change existing ward districts 
within 6 months after the publication of the decennial census. This census 
data was released in 2021 and the city is well behind schedule. The delay has 
sparked concerns among city leaders about its impact on the upcoming 
election cycle. The Common Council postponed redistricting until 2025 after 
receiving approval from Mayor Chris Rosenquest. This request was made 
due to the tight timeline to pass redistricting plans with a presidential primary 
coming in April. This decision goes against § C-34 of the city’s Charter and 
could subject the city to a legal challenge. 
  
VOTING RIGHTS 
  
In First NYVRA Lawsuit, The Town of Mount Pleasant 
Responds by Challenging Constitutionality of NYVRA: Sergio 
Serratto et al v. Town of Mount Pleasant et al 
 
On January 29, the attorneys for the Town of Mount Pleasant responded to 
Hispanic voters’ allegations of vote dilution and presented numerous 
defenses to the voters’ claims. Most notably, the Town asserts that the claims 
are invalid because the New York Voting Rights Act “violates the Fourteenth 
and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” Additionally, 
the Town contends that the federal Voting Rights Act preempts, or 
supersedes, the NYVRA because the state law compels localities to “engage 
in race-based” action in situations where the federal VRA does not. 
  
Mt. Pleasant has retained the national law firm Baker Hostetler to defend 
against the lawsuit, signaling that the town may be prepared to make a major 
challenge against the state’s Voting Rights Act . 
             
CENSUS 
  
N.Y.’s Puerto Rican Population Declines 
  
 
 
From CUNY: “A new study conducted by Center for Latin American, 
Caribbean and Latino Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center has unveiled 
notable changes in the demographics of New York City's Puerto Rican and 
Dominican populations that reflect a significant decrease in the Puerto Rican 
population in New York City, particularly after 2017. This decline is attributed 
to factors such as migration to surrounding areas and other states, possibly 
influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic and economic challenges. 
“The Puerto Rican population of New York City peaked in 1970 at nearly 
900,000 and gradually declined thereafter.  A gradual process of 
suburbanization ensued as Puerto Ricans moved to the northern suburban 
counties, New Jersey, and Long Island,” said Professor Laird Bergad, the 
report’s author. 
Bergad indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated both the 
population decline in the city and the move to the surrounding suburbs. 
Between 2017 and 2022, the number of Puerto Ricans living in the five 
boroughs dropped by almost 20% from about 715,000 to 574,000. 
The report, based on data from the American Community Survey 1-year 
sample, shows that the Dominican population of the city had become the 
largest Latino nationality in about 2015 and continued to expand thereafter. 
Although there was a slight decline of -0.3% between 2017 and 2022, there 
were over 745,000 Dominicans living in New York City in 2022. If we examine 
the entire New York metropolitan region, there were over 1.1 million Puerto 
Ricans living in the area compared with over 1.2 million Dominicans in 2022.” 
  
EVENTS  
  
New York State Redistricting: On Tuesday, February 6th at 6:00 PM, an 
update featuring Jeff Wice of New York Law School will be presented by New 
York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams. Common Cause NY’s Susan 
Lerner will update viewers on state election law reform issues. You can pre-
register for the event 
at www.redistricting2024.eventbrite.com or https://bit.ly/49kmYsI 
  
APA VOICE held a webinar last Tuesday, January 30th. The New York 
Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) has been ordered by the highest 
court to redraw the congressional lines and to submit the new lines to the 
State Legislature for approval by February 28th.  You can view this webinar 
on YouTube to learn about APA VOICE’s priorities on why public input and 
transparency is critical. View it 
here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQFwFiTcBZE 
  
Hold The Date: a People’s Hearing on the state congressional redistricting 
process and need for a new map is being planned for Thursday, February 15 
 
 
at 6:00 PM. The event is being organized by several good government 
groups. More details in next week’s update.  
  
 
AROUND THE NATION 
  
North Carolina: On Wednesday, January 31st , North Carolina voters initiated 
a lawsuit challenging the state’s recently enacted congressional and 
legislative maps. The redrawing occurred almost 5 months after the NC 
Supreme Court overturned its prior decisions rejecting maps based on 
partisan gerrymandering. The most recent ruling prohibited any future 
partisan gerrymandering challenges to state redistricting maps under the 
state constitution’s Free Elections Clause.  
  
The plaintiffs contend that the North Carolina General Assembly redistricted 
in a way that created an unfair partisan advantage for GOP candidates, which 
in turn violates the state constitution’s right to “frequent” and “free” elections 
because this advantage is not “fair,” which is arguably guaranteed in frequent 
and free elections. The lawsuit points to the 6th, 13th, and 14th 
Congressional Districts, the 7th state Senate District, and the 105th state 
House District. The plaintiffs ask that the state court prohibit the use of the 
challenged maps for future elections. 
  
Wisconsin: Dr. Bernard Grofman and Dr. Jonathan Cervas, the redistricting 
experts hired by the Wisconsin Supreme Court have now evaluated six 
proposed legislative maps and determined that two Republican-drawn maps 
are “partisan gerrymanders” and should not be considered. In December, the 
Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down the state’s legislative maps, ruling that 
they violated the state constitution’s new contiguity requirements. Last week, 
Governor Tony Evers vetoed redistricting maps that the Republican-majority 
legislature had altered and attempted to push through at the last minute. The 
state court will now decide on the maps out of the six proposals. 
  
The experts approved of Evers’ original maps in their report, along with three 
others: one from Democratic representatives, one from University of 
Wisconsin-Milwaukee professors, and one proposed by the petitioners who 
sued over the original redistricting maps. The experts did not recommend any 
specific map, leaving that decision to be made solely by the Court. The new 
maps must be in place by March 15, 2024. 


February 5 Roundtable Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
7-15-2024 
July 15 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 
 
VOTING RIGHTS 
 
Mt. Pleasant: Town Board Challengers Ask For Court 
Conference 
  
Attorneys for the voters challenging Westchester County’s town board over vote 
dilution issues under the state’s voting rights act have asked Judge David Everett of 
Westchester County State Supreme Court to schedule a conference to resolve a 
dispute between the challengers and the town’s Industrial Development Agency. The 
challengers argue that the agency needs to provide more information on how the 
agency’s actions may have impacted minority residents in matters relating to 
affordable housing. 
  
ELECTIONS 
  
RFK Jr. Expected to Appear on NY’s Presidential Ballot 
  
Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is expected to appear on 
the New York ballot as a candidate for president under the “We The People” ballot 
line. His campaign was able to file more than the minimum 45,000 signatures 
required to become a valid candidate in the state. Other candidates expected to 
appear on the ballot include Cornell West, under the “Justice for All” party line, Shiva 
Ayyadurai, under the “Dr. Shiva” party line and Chase Oliver as the Libertarian Party 
candidate. Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s petitions may not have met the 
qualifying standards. 
  
U.S. Voters Support No-Excuse Early or Absentee Voting, 
According to New Poll 
 
According to a new Pew Research Center survey, which polled 8,600 Americans 
between May 13 and 19, about 6-in-10 Americans agree that any U.S. voter should 
have the option to “vote early or absentee without having to document a reason.” 
However, the survey uncovered wide partisan divides in the answers to this 
question.  
  
For Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 82% stated that early or 
absentee voting should be available to all voters without needing an excuse. In 
comparison, 62% of Republicans and “Republican learners” stated that these 
methods should only be available to voters who have a documented reason for not 
voting in-person on Election Day. 
  
In 2018, the Pew Research Center noted that the majority of Republicans and 
Republican-leaning voters had agreed that voters should not have to document a 
 
 
reason. This belief has now widely switched. According to this report, 63% of 
Republicans believe elections would be less secure if it was easier for voters to cast 
their ballots. In contrast, 58% of Americans do not believe that changing the rules to 
allow for easier early and absentee voting will make elections less secure. 
  
The report also indicated that race, age, and levels of education played a role. For 
example, people with college and postgraduate degrees, individuals younger than 30 
years old, and Black adults were more likely to favor no-excuse early and absentee 
voting. 
  
CENSUS/POPULATION DATA 
  
IRS Migration Data Reveals Slowing Trend for New Yorkers 
  
According to new migration data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the 
outflow of New York taxpayers to other states decreased during the second tax-filing 
period after March 2020. To compile this data, the IRS compared the mailing 
addresses listed on Form 1040 income tax returns for the same individuals and joint-
filing couples. The dataset includes all returns that were filed between late January 
and late September in 2021 and 2022.  
  
The IRS data revealed that over 91% of New York State’s net taxpayer outflow (to 
other states) was from New York City, Long Island, and four lower Hudson Valley 
counties: Dutchess, Orange, Rockland, and Westchester. For New York filers 
moving to other states, the average adjusted gross income in 2021 was $126,665. 
However, the average 2021 incomes that were reported by tax filers moving into 
New York in 2021-22 increased by 38% ($124,391) from 2020-21. This substantial 
increase could be related to a “post-pandemic rebound” by mostly upper-income 
New Yorkers.  
  
Filers in the “$200,000 or more” category, the highest of 7 income categories 
included in the IRS migration data, accounted for 10.5% (31,485) of all outbound 
New York taxpayers. Only 4 states had larger outflows of high-earning taxpayers: 
California (12.3%), New Jersey (12.1%), Connecticut (11.4%), and Washington 
(11%). The average 2021 income for the highest-earning households leaving New 
York State was $713,310.  
  
476,051 New York filers (and their dependents) moved out of state between 2021 
and 2022, a decrease of 2% in comparison to 2020-21. In comparison, the number of 
individuals who moved into New York State increased by almost 13% from 2020-21 
to 2021-22. In total, 253,349 filers and dependents moved into New York between 
2021 and 2022. The state’s net loss to other states amounted to 222,702 filers and 
their dependents, which decreased by 10% from the year prior.  
  
New Yorkers moved to Florida at the highest rates, which amounted to 28% of New 
York’s total net outflow (60,210 net residents). New Yorkers also commonly moved 
to New Jersey (43,274), Pennsylvania (18,570), Connecticut (16,971), and North 
Carolina (16,925). 
 
 
 
Thank you to E.J. McMahon, founder and senior fellow of Empire Center, for 
a detailed analysis of this data. 
  
VOTING RIGHTS 
 
SAVE Act Passes the U.S. House of Representatives 
  
The U.S. House has passed a national proof of citizenship bill, titled the Safeguard 
American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, with a 221-198 vote. President Joe Biden has 
stated he will veto the bill if it is delivered to his desk, so the bill could not 
become  before the 2024 elections.  
  
The SAVE Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act and require people 
who register to vote in federal elections to provide proof of citizenship. Accepted 
documents include a birth certificate, passport, military ID card, naturalization 
certificate, or a government-issued photo ID card. The bill would also require states 
to “purge” noncitizens from their current voter rolls. If an individual is unlawfully 
registered to vote, the Secretary of Homeland Security would determine whether to 
“initiate removal proceedings.”  
  
According to the Biden administration, this bill will only “make it much harder for all 
eligible Americans to register to vote” and increase the likelihood that eligible voters 
will be “purged from voter rolls.”  
 
A survey from Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement, conducted from 
September to October 2023, determined that 1 in 10 eligible voters cannot “easily 
access” proof-of-citizenship documents (e.g., passports).  
  
According to a 2022 report from the Movement Advancement Project, between 15 
and 18 million U.S. adults do not have access to these documents, which 
disproportionately affects members of minority groups. 
   
AROUND THE NATION 
  
MISSISSIPPI: Last week, Mississippi’s state legislative maps were struck down by a 
federal 3-judge panel for diluting Black voting power in certain districts. The panel 
found that three additional majority-Black districts (proposed by the plaintiffs) could 
be drawn under Voting Rights Act/Section two precedents. Last Wednesday, the 
Mississippi Board of Election Commissioners filed arguments in response, arguing 
that it is impossible to both redraw the state’s legislative districts and prepare ballots 
in time for November’s election. 
  
In the 119-page court order, the three-judge panel indicated that new districts should 
be drawn before the next regular legislative session begins in January. Since 
Mississippi held state House and Senate elections in 2023, redrawing some districts 
would require the use of special elections to fill the seats for the remainder of the 4-
year terms. The Election Commission argues that in order to meet other deadlines 
 
 
for special elections to be held on Election Day in November, legislators would need 
to be called into special session and new districts adopted by August 2. 
  
The Election Commission argues that drawing these new boundaries “is not 
realistically achievable” by the August 2 deadline. The court has not yet responded. 
  
UTAH: The Utah Supreme Court has “revived a claim” from voters and organizations 
including the League of Women Voters that alleged the Utah Legislature violated its 
state constitution when it repealed a 2018 voter-approved anti-gerrymandering 
initiative. The lawsuit involved Salt Lake County, which leaned Democratic until it 
was divided into four separate congressional districts, resulting in electing only 
Republicans by “wide margins.” State officials had also ignored the map drawn by 
the state’s redistricting commission, which prompted the filing of this suit.  
  
The contested map in the lawsuit was approved by the state legislature after 
stripping power from an independent redistricting commission that had been 
established by Utah voters to ensure that congressional boundaries were drawn 
without involving which party would benefit from each decision. Voters in Utah 
established the commission by approving the “Better Boundaries” ballot initiative in 
2018.  
  
Ballot initiatives passed by Utah voters are equal to laws passed by the Legislature. 
The Utah Supreme Court ruled that lawmakers cannot change laws that have been 
approved through state ballot initiatives unless the lawmakers are reinforcing or 
otherwise not impairing them, or “to advance a compelling government interest.” The 
U.S. Supreme Court also ruled in 2023 that state lawmakers do not have absolute 
power to draw congressional boundaries.  
  
The Court’s ruling will not affect the 2024 elections, as the Court sent the case back 
down to the lower court to revisit the state’s process for redrawing congressional 
maps. For now, the current boundaries will remain.  
  
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. 
 
  


July 15 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Redistricting Roundtable Updates NY Census and Redistricting Institute 
8-19-2024 
August 19 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
New York Law School, jeffrey.wice@nyls.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
Recommended Citation 
Wice, Jeffrey M., "August 19 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update" (2024). Redistricting Roundtable 
Updates. 162. 
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates/162 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the NY Census and Redistricting Institute at 
DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Redistricting Roundtable Updates by an authorized 
administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, 
farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
 
 
 
 
 
      N.Y. ELECTIONS, CENSUS & REDISTRICTING UPDATE 
  
REDISTRICTING 
  
Orange County Legislature Inches Forward With New Map 
 
In what may be the final county legislative redistricting process in the state, the 
Orange County Legislature has approved one map to move forward to a public 
comment period before a public hearing is scheduled on Tuesday, August 27that 5:00 
PM.  After disagreeing for weeks on how to proceed, the legislature’s Rules 
Committee broke a logjam last week after debating whether to send several maps to 
public comment or just one map. The county has seen dramatic population growth in 
several communities, requiring major shifts in district boundaries under the new state 
criteria. 
  
ELECTION LAW 
 
Lawsuit Challenges Equal Rights Amendment Over 
“Abortion” 
 
Arguments have begun in a new lawsuit against the wording of the state ERA 
amendment on the November ballot. A new law enacted last year requires ballot 
language for voter referendum questions in New York State to be written in plain 
language at “no higher than an eighth-grade reading level.” The ERA’s ballot 
language, which was recently approved by the New York State’s Board of Elections 
(BOE), has been scored at a college reading level. As a result, two New York voters 
filed a lawsuit against the state BOE. 
  
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA would amend the state constitution to 
additionally ban discrimination based on age, disability, ethnicity, gender expression, 
gender identity, national origin, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, reproductive health 
care and autonomy, sex, and sexual orientation. The ERA would not preserve one’s 
right to have an abortion but would prevent discrimination against individuals for 
having an abortion.  
  
The voters argue that this college-level score is clear evidence the ballot language 
violates the new law. Additionally, the plaintiffs argue that the current language does 
not include terms such as “LGBT” or “abortion,” even though the ERA intends to 
enshrine abortion protections and rights for the LGBT+ community into the state 
constitution.  
  
The state BOE chose in late July to use the ballot measure’s technical language 
verbatim rather than to interpret the ERA’s language into a simpler explanation for 
the ballot. Democrats have argued that including terms such as “abortion” and 
“LGBT” would make the ERA’s intent clearer to voters and have urged the BOE to do 
so. The BOE’s Democrats have now filed court documents that agree the ERA’s 
 
 
ballot language should include the term “abortion.” The voters hope to change the 
ballot language before the November election.  
  
As of now, it is unclear when the court will decide in this lawsuit. The New York 
Board of Elections must certify what will be on the ballot by September 11, and all 
county boards of elections must certify this information by September 12. 
  
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Will Not Appear on New York State 
Presidential Ballot 
  
Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will no longer appear on 
New York’s presidential ballot in November, a lower court in Albany ruled last 
Monday. This decision stems from a lawsuit filed on behalf of New Yorkers, which 
sought to invalidate RFK Jr.’s nominating petition on the grounds that the presidential 
candidate falsely claimed to live in New York State. 
  
A non-jury trial took place over four days earlier this month. Justice Christina Ryba, a 
trial court judge, issued a nearly immediate decision under New York election law in 
favor of the plaintiffs.  
  
RFK Jr. testified that his move to California ten years ago was “only temporary” and 
that he intended to move back to New York. At the time of the trial, the presidential 
candidate was allegedly renting a room in his friend’s home in Katonah, but he 
testified that he has only slept in that room once due to “constant campaign travel.”  
  
As stated in the decision by Justice Ryba, “The overwhelming credible evidence 
introduced at trial established that Kennedy’s connections with the 84 Croton Lake 
Road address existed only on paper and were maintained for the sole purpose of 
maintaining his voter registration and political standing in the State of New York.”  
  
This decision, which has now been appealed, will likely lead to additional lawsuits to 
remove RFK Jr. from other states’ ballots, as he listed the same New York address 
other state election filings.  
  
If the presidential candidate is ultimately found to be a California resident, he would 
be ineligible to receive California’s electoral college votes. The 12th Amendment of 
the U.S. Constitution bars candidates from receiving a state’s electoral college votes 
if both candidates are from the same state. RJK Jr.’s running mate, Nicole 
Shanahan, is a resident of California. 
  
VOTING RIGHTS 
   
Appellate Division Hears Absentee Voting Law Appeal 
    
Arguments have now been heard in New York’s Albany-based Appellate Division, 
Third Department over an absentee voting law. The matter involves one sentence in 
New York Election Law that was added in 2021 and supported by Democrats. 
Republicans brought this case as a result, claiming the law could lead to “rampant 
 
 
voter fraud” across New York State. The Court will now decide whether this law is 
unconstitutional or shall remain in place.  
  
The challenged law amended the Election Law to “change the process for 
canvassing absentee, military, special and affidavit ballots in order to obtain the 
results of an election in a more expedited manner and to assure that every valid vote 
by a qualified voter is counted.”  
  
The sentence at issue states, “If the central board of canvassers splits as to whether 
a ballot is valid, it shall prepare such ballot to be cast and canvassed pursuant to this 
subdivision.” This case focuses on what should happen in the event that a board 
member believes the signatures do not match. The parties agree on its meaning: “If 
a member of the board thinks the signatures match but another member disagrees, 
that vote is presumed to be valid and is counted.” 
  
This law was intended to (1) prevent absentee ballots from being incorrectly thrown 
out and (2) to expedite election results by avoiding board conflicts regarding the 
validity of ballots. In this case, Republicans argue that this law is in violation of the 
New York Constitution, and that the law could “open the door” to fraud from 
individuals who “unlawfully vote by mail on behalf of others or who die before an 
election.” 
  
As argued by Assistant Solicitor General Sarah Rosenbluth, who represented New 
York in the hearing at the appellate court, “In the in-person context, it’s the same 
presumption of validity and that’s been a rule for decades.” 
  
Republicans further argue that a section of the New York Constitution requires equal 
party representation on boards of elections and when votes are counted. Here, the 
reasoning is that this section would be violated when one party usurps the other 
regarding the validity of an absentee ballot.   
  
The Third Department should issue a decision in the next few weeks. Thank you to 
Dan Clark at the Albany Times Union for its reporting on this case. 
   
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT 
   
Nassau County Legislature: Coads et al. v. Nassau County & 
NY Communities for Change v. Nassau County 
  
Two coordinated lawsuit challenges to the 2023 redistricting map for the Nassau 
County Legislature, which went into effect on February 28, have received updates. 
  
On August 13, Supreme Court Judge Paul I. Marx signed a proposed order from 
August 5. Four notices of entry were filed regarding the court’s decisions and orders. 
Additionally, four notices of appeal were filed by the parties on August 13.  
  
The appellants, including the Nassau County Legislature, filed two notices that 
appealed “each and every portion” of the order regarding two joint letters: one from 
April 10, 2024, and one from May 14, 2024. Appellant non-party Dr. Sean Trende, a 
 
 
redistricting expert and litigation consultant who informed the firm’s legal advice 
in Coads et al., appealed the order. Appellant non-party Mr. Misha Tseytlin, the 
county defense attorney, also appealed the order.  
  
On August 14, Plaintiffs in both the Coads et al. and NY Communities for 
Change (NYCC) actions wrote a letter of correspondence to request that the court 
issue an executory order compelling Dr. Trende and Mr. Tseytlin to produce the 
documents requested in the subpoenas at issue in the July 31 and August 7 orders 
prior to their depositions and “no later than” August 23, 2024.  
  
Another proposed order was filed on August 14 and awaits the court’s decision. 
  
Lastly, on August 16, another letter of correspondence was filed with the court. 
Pursuant to the August 7 order, the plaintiffs and defendants in NYCC wrote jointly 
regarding the new requests for admissions (“RFAs”) that the NYCC plaintiffs intend 
to propound and the parties’ disputes over RFAs already propounded. 
  
Town Of Mount Pleasant (Westchester) Serratto et al. v. Town 
of Mount Pleasant 
  
This lawsuit was filed in January by Mount Pleasant Hispanic community voters. The 
suit asserts that the Town’s use of an at-large method of election, where all voters 
elect the Town Supervisor and all four Town Board members, led to racially polarized 
voting and prevented Hispanic voters from electing the candidate of their choice.  
  
On August 13, the plaintiffs filed a statement of material facts, a motion for summary 
judgment, a memorandum of law in support of their motion for summary judgment 
and exhibits A through Z and AA through ZZ.  
  
On August 13, the defendants similarly filed a statement of material facts, a motion 
for summary judgment, and a memorandum of law in support of their motion. 
Additionally, the defendants filed an affirmation of Ariana Dindiyal in support of their 
motion for summary judgment, as well as exhibits A through R.  
  
AROUND THE NATION 
  
U.S. Fifth Circuit Decision Undermines the Voting Rights Act: On August 1, the 
5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned long-standing precedents in a 12-6 
decision, ruling that the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) does not permit claims for 
coalition districts. Coalition districts are claims “in which two or more minority groups 
join together to bring a collective claim challenging an electoral map.”  
  
Earlier this month, the Court ruled that a coalition of Black and Latino voters (who 
formed a majority-minority district in Galveston County, TX) cannot bring claims of 
vote dilution under the VRA in this lawsuit against Galveston County’s 
commissioners court map. A group of voters sued over the map in 2022, and a 
federal court struck down the map in 2023.  
  
 
 
That ruling struck down part of the lower court’s finding, which ruled that the 2021 
map adopted by the commissioners court violated Section 2 of the VRA and denied 
Black and Latino voters an “equal opportunity to participate in the political process 
and to elect a candidate of their choice.” 
  
In 2023, a 3-judge panel affirmed the lower court’s ruling after Galveston County 
officials appealed to the 5th Circuit. However, the panel also requested a hearing 
from the 5th Circuit to reconsider precedent that allows for “minority-coalition” claims 
of vote dilution under the VRA; an issue of which the Supreme Court has not ruled. 
  
The en banc decision from the circuit court overturns its 1987 ruling in Campos v. 
City of Baytown, which allowed coalition district claims in situations where minority 
groups could show that they were “politically cohesive.”  
  
No information has been provided on whether the plaintiffs will seek review of the 
decision by the Supreme Court. Campaign Legal Center attorney Valencia 
Richardson, representing the individual plaintiffs in this lawsuit, stated that they are 
“considering next steps at this time.” 
  
Ohio Redistricting: The Ohio Ballot Board chose to certify ballot language in a 3-2 
vote for a redistricting amendment to the Ohio Constitution, which will be a ballot 
measure in November. Supporters of the ballot measure claim this language will be 
deceiving to voters. 
  
With this measure, Ohio voters will decide whether to remove the 7-member Ohio 
Redistricting Commission, all of which are politicians (currently 5 Republicans and 2 
Democrats), in favor of the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission.  
  
This commission would have 15 members: 5 matching the governor’s political party 
at the time, 5 from the party of the “gubernatorial candidate who received the 
second-most votes in the most recent election,” and 5 unaffiliated members.  
  
Don McTigue, an attorney with the ballot campaign, told the Board that the language 
is false and misleading. For example, McTigue argued that they could have said the 
commission will “draw the maps” instead of “manipulate the boundaries,” which is 
misleading and has a clear negative connotation.  
  
Two attempts were made to certify the language proposed by the ballot campaign 
instead, but the Board voted down both motions. Citizens Not Politicians, the 
campaign responsible for the amendment, recommended five bullet points for the 
ballot language. However, the Board is not required to use the same language as 
recommended by the ballot campaigners.  
  
If the current draft ballot language is approved by the Board, Citizens Not Politicians 
would sue. The ballot language may violate the Ohio Constitution, which prohibits 
any wording that is designed to “mislead, deceive or defraud” voters. 
 
 
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 19 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1077/thumbnail.jp

Gillingham, Allison

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
3-28-2024 
preLaw Magazine Names NYLS a Top School in Spring 2024 Issue 
Allison Gillingham 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Practical Training
Experiential learning is an integral component of the innovative 
legal education that students receive at NYLS. The School offers 
a wide array of opportunities for students to gain hands-on 
experience through The Plumeri Center, which houses our many 
clinics, externships, simulation courses, and more programs that 
enable students to put the skills they learn in the classroom into 
practice.
Simulation courses prepare students to work with clients by giving 
them the opportunity to practice lawyering skills in a controlled 
classroom environment led by experienced faculty. NYLS also 
offers more than 20 clinics, like the Asylum Clinic, the Nonprofit 
and Small Business Clinic, and the Post-Conviction Innocence 
Clinic, where students can use their lawyering skills to represent 
real clients under faculty supervision
In the Externship Program, upper-level students earn academic 
credits while gaining real-world experience. Students can find 
placements in practice areas that match their interests, such as 
the Financial Services Law Externship program or the Judicial 
Externship program. They can also apply to two full-time Honors 
Externship programs that provide students with vital legal 
experience in the public sector: one in Washington, D.C. and one 
in the heart of New York City.  
Through the Harris Keenan & Goldfarb Advocacy Program at 
NYLS, students have exciting opportunities to develop advocacy, 
litigation, and negotiation skills by participating in co-curricular 
competition teams and other experiential learning programs.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
NYLS’s recognition in ADR reflects the School’s commitment 
to training future lawyers in innovative methods of resolving 
legal conflicts outside the traditional courtroom setting. preLaw 
highlights two standout aspects of our comprehensive ADR 
program: our moot court and competition teams and the ADR 
Skills Program. 
NYLS excels in moot court and mediation competitions, offering 
students numerous opportunities to compete nationally and 
internationally. Every year, the School sends a team to the Willem 
C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot, held in Vienna, 
Austria. Members of the student-led Dispute Resolution Team 
(DRT) also frequently compete in the competitive International 
Commercial Mediation Competition in Paris. 
The ADR Skills Program provides students with the necessary 
skills to navigate and excel in the evolving practice area, 
empowering them to become effective negotiators and problem-
solvers. Students can advance their study in areas of conflict 
avoidance, management, and resolution and develop practical 
skills in area-specific dispute resolution regimes such as 
employment, securities, and family law dispute resolution.  
A focused externship program also affords students  
opportunities to observe and participate in actual arbitration  
and mediation procedures and to develop professional contacts  
in the field. 
preLaw Magazine Names 
NYLS a Top School in Spring 
2024 Issue
 Allison Gillingham  •  Published March 28, 2024
New York Law School (NYLS) is honored to be ranked among the “Top Schools” in preLaw 
magazine. In preLaw’s latest issue, NYLS earned high marks in practical training, alternative 
dispute resolution (ADR), environmental law, and intellectual property law. Learn more about 
the School’s standout programs in these areas.
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.
Environmental Law
At NYLS, students can explore environmental law—another 
area in which the School received high marks—through a variety 
of courses and hands-on opportunities where they can make 
an impact. NYLS offers environmental law courses such as 
Environmental Law and Policy or Brownfields Redevelopment, 
designed to equip students with the knowledge and skills to 
address complex environmental challenges.
With growing concerns about environmental sustainability and 
justice, students also have the opportunity to learn from and 
engage with leaders in the field. In the fall semester, students 
had the opportunity to attend the 2023 Summit on Climate, 
Environmental Justice, Racism, and the Law as part of the Civil 
Rights and Disability Justice Clinic, which is currently working to 
represent Brooklyn community members impacted by a fracking 
gas pipeline built through their neighborhoods. Students in the 
Conservation Law and Policy Clinic gain practical experience as 
they work with The Nature Conservancy (TNC), a leading national 
and global conservation organization, on projects covering legal and 
policy issues related to public and private arenas.
Intellectual Property
Intellectual property law is another area where NYLS shines. 
Students can take specialized coursework and gain hands-on 
experience in areas such as copyright, patent, and trademark law. 
In fact, students in the Patent Law Clinic (PLC) recently helped 
an inventor patent technology to assist children with hearing 
disabilities and one who created a new exercise device. The 
students benefited from engaging with real-world issues that 
prepared them for careers in intellectual property law practice.
Through the Innovation Center for Law and Technology, law 
students gain access to a cutting-edge approach to education and 
skills training in intellectual property and other intersections of law 
and technology. Through courses, projects, events, and research, 
the Innovation Center brings together practitioners, students, and 
scholars to create the future of legal practice.
(Sources: The National Jurist’s preLaw magazine (2023–24), The 
Princeton Review, and Law.com)
(Sources: The National Jurist’s preLaw magazine (2023–24), The Princeton Review, and Law.com)
for total number of placements in 
GOLD STANDARD PUBLIC SECTOR  
CHILD 
and FAMILY LAW
HUMAN 
RIGHTS 
LAWSchools for  DIVERSITY
Schools for 
PUBLIC SERVICE 
CAREERS
REAL ESTATE LAW
BEST
Named A
A+
GOVERNMENT 
LAW 
and 
PUBLIC 
POLICY
5GREATEST RESOURCES for WOMEN
2#
BEST
A
A+
Named
Named
Named
INTELLECTUAL 
PROPERTY LAW ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE 
RESOLUTIONA
BEST
LAW  
SCHOOL  
BUILDINGS A
BEST
Schools for  
PRACTICAL TRAINING
NATIONALLY
TOP
TECHNOLOGY
LAW
A


preLaw Magazine Names NYLS a Top School in Spring 2024 Issue

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1071/thumbnail.jp

Law School, New York

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
2-25-2024 
Passing of Sally Harding, Dean of Students, Emerita 
New York Law School 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Dear NYLS Community,
I write with profound sadness and a heavy heart to let you know that Dean of Students, Emerita, Sally Harding 
tragically passed away earlier today.
In December 2021, Sally was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, commonly known as ALS. Our 
deepest condolences go out to Sally’s loving family, including her spouse Thomas FitzMaurice, and their two 
children Katie and William, all of whom gave her exceptional care at home since her diagnosis. Like Sally, they 
will always be part of the NYLS family. 
As you know, for 133 years, the NYLS community has been one of groundbreakers. And, Sally will be forever 
remembered as one of them for her unmatched impact on countless students, and for creating the welcoming 
and supportive community that makes NYLS unique. Her dedication and courage must always serve as an 
inspiration to our community.
Sally served NYLS with distinction for 32 years, retiring in 2023 as Dean of Students. She served her entire 
time in the Office of Student Life, where she devoted all of her energy and efforts towards the success and 
well-being of the School’s extraordinarily diverse student body. She held every position in the Office of Student 
Life, beginning as Administrative Assistant and rising all the way to lead the Office in 2016. I was proud to 
appoint her as Dean of Students in 2020.
Sally provided a support system to countless students, acting as a shoulder to lean on, a confidant, a mental 
health counselor, and an indispensable advisor on how to succeed academically and professionally. She was 
largely responsible for creating the warm, welcoming, and inclusive community that many students point to as 
their reason for attending NYLS, and what they appreciate most from their time on campus. In recognition of 
her dedication to the students, many student organizations honored her over the years, including the Black Law 
Students Association, the Latino Law Students Association, the Student Bar Association, and the Public Interest 
Coalition. 
Throughout her tenure as an administrative leader, Sally also served as an essential sounding board, advisor, 
and partner to all of her colleagues, particularly me. We all relied upon Sally for her unparalleled understanding 
of the School’s students in order to establish the most advanced, innovative, and exhaustive set of student 
services of any law school in the nation. After her diagnosis, she continued to tirelessly champion students 
during one of the most challenging times in the School’s history during the COVID-19 pandemic. She was 
cherished friend to countless alumni, administrators, and faculty. She was kind, authentic, and a genuinely good 
person in every way. 
In recognition of her extraordinary service, we bestowed upon her the President’s Medal, the Law School’s 
highest honor, at our 2023 Commencement last May. Sally’s daughter Katie accepted the award on her 
mother’s behalf, while Sally watched the ceremony via livestream. At that time, Sally wrote a message to her 
beloved NYLS Community. It read:
Passing of Sally Harding,  
Dean of Students, Emerita
New York Law School  •  Published February 25, 2024
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.
And, indeed Sally will always have a place in our hearts! 
During Commencement, we presented Sally with a book of wonderful memories and pictures of her and 
her colleagues. If you would like to send a message to Sally’s family, please e-mail studentlife@nyls.edu and we 
will create a memory book of your messages for her family.
Peace, 
Dean Crowell
Anthony W. Crowell 
Dean and President 
Professor of Law 
New York Law School
Message from Sally Harding, Dean of Students, Emerita 
I offer my congratulations to the graduating Class of 2023. I started working at New York Law School over 
30 years ago. From the beginning, I knew that New York Law School would become my second home. 
My colleagues quickly became my friends, and together we supported and educated thousands of 
students. The students then became part of our New York Law School family as well. 
The Office of Student Life has a long-standing reputation of comfort and trust. Students knew they could 
come to us for academic and moral support. In my position, I had the privilege of working closely with 
the entire student body.
In February of this year, I retired from New York Law School. However, despite my ALS diagnosis, I will 
remain a member of the NYLS family.
I thank you for the honor bestowed upon me today. New York Law School will always have a place in my 
heart.


New York Law School

Not a member yet