ballotpedia.org

Redistricting in New York

Public Policy Logo-one line.pngin New York

Election Policy Logo.png

Redistricting after the 2020 census
The 2020 cycle
Congressional apportionment
Redistricting before 2024 elections
Redistricting committees
Deadlines
Lawsuits
Timeline of redistricting maps
2022 House elections with multiple incumbents
New U.S.House districts created after apportionment
Congressional maps
State legislative maps
General information
State-by-state redistricting procedures
United States census, 2020
Majority-minority districts
Gerrymandering
Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker

Redistricting is the process by which new congressional and state legislative district boundaries are drawn. Each of New York's 26 United States Representatives and 213 state legislators are elected from political divisions called districts. United States Senators are not elected by districts, but by the states at large. District lines are redrawn every 10 years following completion of the United States census. The federal government stipulates that districts must have nearly equal populations and must not discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity.[1][2][3][4]

New York was apportioned 26 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives after the 2020 census, 1 fewer than it received after the 2010 census. Click here for more information about redistricting in New York after the 2020 census.

HIGHLIGHTS

  • Following the 2020 United States Census, New York was apportioned 26 congressional districts, one less than the number it had after the 2010 census.

  • New York's House of Representatives is made up of 150 districts; New York's State Senate is made up of 63 districts.

  • In 2014, New York voters approved a constitutional amendment establishing a politician commission for both congressional and state legislative redistricting. The commission was set to take over the redistricting process beginning in 2020.

    • On February 28, 2024, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed a new congressional map into law. The state Assembly voted 115-35 to approve the map on February 27. The state Senate voted 45-18 to approve the map the same day.[5][6][7]

    According to Nicholar Fandos of The New York Times, "Although a pair of swing districts would become more Democratic, lawmakers in Albany left the partisan makeup of 24 of the state’s 26 districts largely intact. The middle-ground approach reflected a desire to avoid another protracted court fight like the one in New York that helped swing control of the House to Republicans in 2022, while still better positioning Democrats in key districts."[6]

    On December 12, 2023, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, ruled in a 4-3 decision that the independent redistricting commission did not follow the state's congressional redistricting process and ordered the commission to reconvene and re-draw congressional district boundaries by February 28 for use in the 2024 elections.[8] The court's majority opinion stated, "In 2014, the voters of New York amended our Constitution to provide that legislative districts be drawn by an Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC). The Constitution demands that process, not districts drawn by courts. Nevertheless, the IRC failed to discharge its constitutional duty. That dereliction is undisputed. The Appellate Division concluded that the IRC can be compelled to reconvene to fulfill that duty; we agree. There is no reason the Constitution should be disregarded."[9]


    State Assembly districts
    New York enacted new State Assembly district boundaries on April 24, 2023, when Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed legislation establishing them for use starting with the 2024 elections.[10] The bill adopting the districts passed earlier that day in the State Assembly by a vote of 132-13, and it passed the state Senate by a vote of 59-1.[11][12] The legislation stated, "Vacancies in the Assembly will be filled using existing boundaries until January 1, 2025, at which time vacancies will be filled using the new boundaries."[13]

    The state redrew its Assembly district boundaries in response to a June 10, 2022, decision by the appellate division of the New York Supreme Court in Nichols v. Hochul.[14] That court upheld a lower court ruling that declared the state's Assembly district boundaries invalid but determined that they should still be used for the 2022 legislative elections since the lawsuit challenging them was filed too close to those elections for the courts to intervene.[15] The appellate division ruling determined that the Assembly district map was enacted in violation of the state's constitutional redistricting process and ordered a New York City-based state trial court to oversee the redrawing of boundaries for the 2024 elections.[15] On September 29, 2022, that trial court directed the IRC to "initiate the constitutional process for amending the assembly district map based on the 2020 census data by formulating a proposed assembly map" and submit such a plan to the legislature by April 28, 2023.[16] Click here for more information on maps enacted after the 2020 census.

    See the sections below for further information on the following topics:

    1. Background: A summary of federal requirements for redistricting at both the congressional and state legislative levels
    2. State process: An overview about the redistricting process in New York
    3. District maps: Information about the current district maps in New York
    4. Redistricting by cycle: A breakdown of the most significant events in New York's redistricting after recent censuses
    5. State legislation and ballot measures: State legislation and state and local ballot measures relevant to redistricting policy
    6. Political impacts of redistricting: An analysis of the political issues associated with redistricting

    Background

    This section includes background information on federal requirements for congressional redistricting, state legislative redistricting, state-based requirements, redistricting methods used in the 50 states, gerrymandering, and recent court decisions.

    Federal requirements for congressional redistricting

    According to Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, the states and their legislatures have primary authority in determining the "times, places, and manner" of congressional elections. Congress may also pass laws regulating congressional elections.[17][18]

    “ The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.[19] ”
    —United States Constitution

    Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution stipulates that congressional representatives be apportioned to the states on the basis of population. There are 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives. Each state is allotted a portion of these seats based on the size of its population relative to the other states. Consequently, a state may gain seats in the House if its population grows or lose seats if its population decreases, relative to populations in other states. In 1964, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Wesberry v. Sanders that the populations of House districts must be equal "as nearly as practicable."[20][21][22]

    The equal population requirement for congressional districts is strict. According to All About Redistricting, "Any district with more or fewer people than the average (also known as the 'ideal' population), must be specifically justified by a consistent state policy. And even consistent policies that cause a 1 percent spread from largest to smallest district will likely be unconstitutional."[22]

    Federal requirements for state legislative redistricting

    The United States Constitution is silent on the issue of state legislative redistricting. In the mid-1960s, the United States Supreme Court issued a series of rulings in an effort to clarify standards for state legislative redistricting. In Reynolds v. Sims, the court ruled that "the Equal Protection Clause [of the United States Constitution] demands no less than substantially equal state legislative representation for all citizens, of all places as well as of all races." According to All About Redistricting, "it has become accepted that a [redistricting] plan will be constitutionally suspect if the largest and smallest districts [within a state or jurisdiction] are more than 10 percent apart."[22]

    State-based requirements

    In addition to the federal criteria noted above, individual states may impose additional requirements on redistricting. Common state-level redistricting criteria are listed below.

    1. Contiguity refers to the principle that all areas within a district should be physically adjacent. A total of 49 states require that districts of at least one state legislative chamber be contiguous (Nevada has no such requirement, imposing no requirements on redistricting beyond those enforced at the federal level). A total of 23 states require that congressional districts meet contiguity requirements.[22][23]
    2. Compactness refers to the general principle that the constituents within a district should live as near to one another as practicable. A total of 37 states impose compactness requirements on state legislative districts; 18 states impose similar requirements for congressional districts.[22][23]
    3. A community of interest is defined by FairVote as a "group of people in a geographical area, such as a specific region or neighborhood, who have common political, social or economic interests." A total of 24 states require that the maintenance of communities of interest be considered in the drawing of state legislative districts. A total of 13 states impose similar requirements for congressional districts.[22][23]
    4. A total of 42 states require that state legislative district lines be drawn to account for political boundaries (e.g., the limits of counties, cities, and towns). A total of 19 states require that similar considerations be made in the drawing of congressional districts.[22][23]

    Methods

    In general, a state's redistricting authority can be classified as one of the following:[24]

    1. Legislature-dominant: In a legislature-dominant state, the legislature retains the ultimate authority to draft and enact district maps. Maps enacted by the legislature may or may not be subject to gubernatorial veto. Advisory commissions may also be involved in the redistricting process, although the legislature is not bound to adopt an advisory commission's recommendations.
    2. Commission: In a commission state, an extra-legislative commission retains the ultimate authority to draft and enact district maps. A non-politician commission is one whose members cannot hold elective office. A politician commission is one whose members can hold elective office.
    3. Hybrid: In a hybrid state, the legislature shares redistricting authority with a commission.

    Gerrymandering

    In 1812, Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed into law a state Senate district map that, according to the Encyclopædia Britannica, "consolidated the Federalist Party vote in a few districts and thus gave disproportionate representation to Democratic-Republicans." The word gerrymander was coined by The Boston Gazette to describe the district.

    See also: Gerrymandering

    The term gerrymandering refers to the practice of drawing electoral district lines to favor one political party, individual, or constituency over another. When used in a rhetorical manner by opponents of a particular district map, the term has a negative connotation but does not necessarily address the legality of a challenged map. The term can also be used in legal documents; in this context, the term describes redistricting practices that violate federal or state laws.[1][25]

    For additional background information about gerrymandering, click "[Show more]" below.

    Show more

    The phrase racial gerrymandering refers to the practice of drawing electoral district lines to dilute the voting power of racial minority groups. Federal law prohibits racial gerrymandering and establishes that, to combat this practice and to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act, states and jurisdictions can create majority-minority electoral districts. A majority-minority district is one in which a racial group or groups comprise a majority of the district's populations. Racial gerrymandering and majority-minority districts are discussed in greater detail in this article.[26]

    The phrase partisan gerrymandering refers to the practice of drawing electoral district maps with the intention of favoring one political party over another. In contrast with racial gerrymandering, on which the Supreme Court of the United States has issued rulings in the past affirming that such practices violate federal law, the high court had not, as of November 2017, issued a ruling establishing clear precedent on the question of partisan gerrymandering. Although the court has granted in past cases that partisan gerrymandering can violate the United States Constitution, it has never adopted a standard for identifying or measuring partisan gerrymanders. Partisan gerrymandering is described in greater detail in this article.[27][28]

    Recent court decisions

    See also: Redistricting cases heard by the Supreme Court of the United States

    The Supreme Court of the United States has, in recent years, issued several decisions dealing with redistricting policy, including rulings relating to the consideration of race in drawing district maps, the use of total population tallies in apportionment, and the constitutionality of independent redistricting commissions. The rulings in these cases, which originated in a variety of states, impact redistricting processes across the nation.

    For additional background information about these cases, click "[Show more]" below.

    Show more

    Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (2024)

    See also: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP

    Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP — This case concerns a challenge to the congressional redistricting plan that the South Carolina legislature enacted after the 2020 census. In January 2023, a federal three-judge panel ruled that the state's 1st Congressional District was unconstitutional and enjoined the state from conducting future elections using its district boundaries. The panel's opinion said, "The Court finds that race was the predominant factor motivating the General Assembly’s adoption of Congressional District No. 1...Defendants have made no showing that they had a compelling state interest in the use of race in the design of Congressional District No. 1 and thus cannot survive a strict scrutiny review."[29] Thomas Alexander (R)—in his capacity as South Carolina State Senate president—appealed the federal court's ruling, arguing: :In striking down an isolated portion of South Carolina Congressional District 1 as a racial gerrymander, the panel never even mentioned the presumption of the General Assembly’s “good faith.”...The result is a thinly reasoned order that presumes bad faith, erroneously equates the purported racial effect of a single line in Charleston County with racial predominance across District 1, and is riddled with “legal mistake[s]” that improperly relieved Plaintiffs of their “demanding” burden to prove that race was the “predominant consideration” in District 1.[30] The U.S. Supreme Court scheduled oral argument on this case for October 11, 2023.[31]

    Moore v. Harper (2023)

    See also: Moore v. Harper

    At issue in Moore v. Harper, was whether state legislatures alone are empowered by the Constitution to regulate federal elections without oversight from state courts, which is known as the independent state legislature doctrine. On November 4, 2021, the North Carolina General Assembly adopted a new congressional voting map based on 2020 Census data. The legislature, at that time, was controlled by the Republican Party. In the case Harper v. Hall (2022), a group of Democratic Party-affiliated voters and nonprofit organizations challenged the map in state court, alleging that the new map was a partisan gerrymander that violated the state constitution.[32] On February 14, 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the state could not use the map in the 2022 elections and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The trial court adopted a new congressional map drawn by three court-appointed experts. The United States Supreme Court affirmed the North Carolina Supreme Court's original decision in Moore v. Harper that the state's congressional district map violated state law. In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the "Elections Clause does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.[33]

    Merrill v. Milligan (2023)

    See also: Merrill v. Milligan

    At issue in Merrill v. Milligan, was the constitutionality of Alabama's 2021 redistricting plan and whether it violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A group of Alabama voters and organizations sued Secretary of State John Merrill (R) and the House and Senate redistricting chairmen, Rep. Chris Pringle (R) and Sen. Jim McClendon (R). Plaintiffs alleged the congressional map enacted on Nov. 4, 2021, by Gov. Kay Ivey (R) unfairly distributed Black voters. The plaintiffs asked the lower court to invalidate the enacted congressional map and order a new map with instructions to include a second majority-Black district. The court ruled 5-4, affirming the lower court opinion that the plaintiffs showed a reasonable likelihood of success concerning their claim that Alabama's redistricting map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.[34]

    Gill v. Whitford (2018)

    See also: Gill v. Whitford

    In Gill v. Whitford, decided on June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the plaintiffs—12 Wisconsin Democrats who alleged that Wisconsin's state legislative district plan had been subject to an unconstitutional gerrymander in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments—had failed to demonstrate standing under Article III of the United States Constitution to bring a complaint. The court's opinion, penned by Chief Justice John Roberts, did not address the broader question of whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. Roberts was joined in the majority opinion by Associate Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Kagan penned a concurring opinion joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas penned an opinion that concurred in part with the majority opinion and in the judgment, joined by Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.[35]

    Cooper v. Harris (2017)

    See also: Cooper v. Harris

    In Cooper v. Harris, decided on May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the judgment of the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, finding that two of North Carolina's congressional districts, the boundaries of which had been set following the 2010 United States Census, had been subject to an illegal racial gerrymander in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the court's majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor (Thomas also filed a separate concurring opinion). In the court's majority opinion, Kagan described the two-part analysis utilized by the high court when plaintiffs allege racial gerrymandering as follows: "First, the plaintiff must prove that 'race was the predominant factor motivating the legislature's decision to place a significant number of voters within or without a particular district.' ... Second, if racial considerations predominated over others, the design of the district must withstand strict scrutiny. The burden shifts to the State to prove that its race-based sorting of voters serves a 'compelling interest' and is 'narrowly tailored' to that end." In regard to the first part of the aforementioned analysis, Kagan went on to note that "a plaintiff succeeds at this stage even if the evidence reveals that a legislature elevated race to the predominant criterion in order to advance other goals, including political ones." Justice Samuel Alito delivered an opinion that concurred in part and dissented in part with the majority opinion. This opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy.[36][37][38]

    Evenwel v. Abbott (2016)

    See also: Evenwel v. Abbott

    Evenwel v. Abbott was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2016. At issue was the constitutionality of state legislative districts in Texas. The plaintiffs, Sue Evenwel and Edward Pfenninger, argued that district populations ought to take into account only the number of registered or eligible voters residing within those districts as opposed to total population counts, which are generally used for redistricting purposes. Total population tallies include non-voting residents, such as immigrants residing in the country without legal permission, prisoners, and children. The plaintiffs alleged that this tabulation method dilutes the voting power of citizens residing in districts that are home to smaller concentrations of non-voting residents. The court ruled 8-0 on April 4, 2016, that a state or locality can use total population counts for redistricting purposes. The majority opinion was penned by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.[39][40][41][42]

    Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2016)

    Justice Stephen Breyer penned the majority opinion in Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.

    See also: Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission

    Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2016. At issue was the constitutionality of state legislative districts that were created by the commission in 2012. The plaintiffs, a group of Republican voters, alleged that "the commission diluted or inflated the votes of almost two million Arizona citizens when the commission intentionally and systematically overpopulated 16 Republican districts while under-populating 11 Democrat districts." This, the plaintiffs argued, constituted a partisan gerrymander. The plaintiffs claimed that the commission placed a disproportionately large number of non-minority voters in districts dominated by Republicans; meanwhile, the commission allegedly placed many minority voters in smaller districts that tended to vote Democratic. As a result, the plaintiffs argued, more voters overall were placed in districts favoring Republicans than in those favoring Democrats, thereby diluting the votes of citizens in the Republican-dominated districts. The defendants countered that the population deviations resulted from legally defensible efforts to comply with the Voting Rights Act and obtain approval from the United States Department of Justice. At the time of redistricting, certain states were required to obtain preclearance from the U.S. Department of Justice before adopting redistricting plans or making other changes to their election laws—a requirement struck down by the United States Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder (2013). On April 20, 2016, the court ruled unanimously that the plaintiffs had failed to prove that a partisan gerrymander had taken place. Instead, the court found that the commission had acted in good faith to comply with the Voting Rights Act. The court's majority opinion was penned by Justice Stephen Breyer.[44][45]

    Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2015)

    See also: Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission

    Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2015. At issue was the constitutionality of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, which was established by state constitutional amendment in 2000. According to Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, "the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof." The state legislature argued that the use of the word "legislature" in this context is literal; therefore, only a state legislature may draw congressional district lines. Meanwhile, the commission contended that the word "legislature" ought to be interpreted to mean "the legislative powers of the state," including voter initiatives and referenda. On June 29, 2015, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, finding that "redistricting is a legislative function, to be performed in accordance with the state's prescriptions for lawmaking, which may include the referendum and the governor's veto." The majority opinion was penned by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and Samuel Alito dissented.[46][47][48][49]

    Race and ethnicity

    See also: Majority-minority districts

    Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 mandates that electoral district lines cannot be drawn in such a manner as to "improperly dilute minorities' voting power."

    “ No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.[19] ”
    —Voting Rights Act of 1965[50]

    States and other political subdivisions may create majority-minority districts in order to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A majority-minority district is a district in which minority groups compose a majority of the district's total population. As of 2015, New York was home to nine congressional majority-minority districts.[2][3][4]

    Proponents of majority-minority districts maintain that these districts are a necessary hindrance to the practice of cracking, which occurs when a constituency is divided between several districts in order to prevent it from achieving a majority in any one district. In addition, supporters argue that the drawing of majority-minority districts has resulted in an increased number of minority representatives in state legislatures and Congress.[2][3][4]

    Critics, meanwhile, contend that the establishment of majority-minority districts can result in packing, which occurs when a constituency or voting group is placed within a single district, thereby minimizing its influence in other districts. Because minority groups tend to vote Democratic, critics argue that majority-minority districts ultimately present an unfair advantage to Republicans by consolidating Democratic votes into a smaller number of districts.[2][3][4]

    State process

    See also: State-by-state redistricting procedures

    On March 14, 2012, the state legislature approved a constitutional amendment to establish new redistricting procedures beginning in 2020. The New York Constitution requires that two successive legislatures approve an amendment in order to qualify it for final approval by popular vote. The legislature approved the amendment a second time in 2013. On November 4, 2014, voters approved the amendment, the provisions of which were set to take effect during the 2020 redistricting cycle.[51]

    The 10-member commission comprises the following members:[51]

    1. Two members must be appointed by the temporary president of the New York State Senate.
    2. Two members must be appointed by the speaker of the New York State Assembly.
    3. Two members must be appointed by the minority leader of the New York State Senate.
    4. Two members must be appointed by the minority leader of the New York State Assembly.
    5. Two members must appointed by the aforementioned eight commissioners. These two appointees cannot have been enrolled in the top two major political parties in the state.

    The legislature must approve the commission's plans by a simple up/down vote. The legislature must reject two separate sets of redistricting plans before it will be able to amend the commission's proposals. All districts will be required "to preserve minority rights, be equally populated, and consist of compact and contiguous territory." Further, state law will require that districts "not be drawn to discourage competition or to favor/disfavor candidates or parties." In prior redistricting cycles, authority for both congressional and state legislative redistricting was vested with the state legislature. An advisory commission participated in the process.[51]

    State law requires that state legislative districts be contiguous and compact. State legislative districts must also take into account the "historic and traditional significance of counties."[51]

    How incarcerated persons are counted for redistricting

    See also: State-by-state redistricting procedures

    States differ on how they count incarcerated persons for the purposes of redistricting. In New York, inmates who were in-state residents prior to incarceration are counted in their last known residence's district population. Out-of-state residents, inmates with unknown previous residences, and federal inmates are excluded from all district populations.

    District maps

    Congressional districts

    See also: United States congressional delegations from New York

    New York comprises 26 congressional districts. The table below lists New York's current U.S. Representatives.

    Office Name Party Date assumed office Date term ends
    U.S. House New York District 1 Nicholas J. LaLota Republican January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 2 Andrew Garbarino Republican January 3, 2021 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 3 Tom Suozzi Democratic February 28, 2024 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 4 Laura Gillen Democratic January 3, 2025 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 5 Gregory W. Meeks Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 6 Grace Meng Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 7 Nydia Velazquez Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 8 Hakeem Jeffries Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 9 Yvette D. Clarke Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 10 Daniel Goldman Democratic January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 11 Nicole Malliotakis Republican January 3, 2021 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 12 Jerrold Nadler Democratic January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 13 Adriano Espaillat Democratic January 3, 2017 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 14 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Democratic January 3, 2019 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 15 Ritchie Torres Democratic January 3, 2021 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 16 George Latimer Democratic January 3, 2025 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 17 Michael Lawler Republican January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 18 Pat Ryan Democratic January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 19 Josh Riley Democratic January 3, 2025 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 20 Paul Tonko Democratic January 3, 2013 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 21 Elise Stefanik Republican January 3, 2015 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 22 John Mannion Democratic January 3, 2025 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 23 Nick Langworthy Republican January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 24 Claudia Tenney Republican January 3, 2023 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 25 Joseph Morelle Democratic November 13, 2018 January 3, 2027
    U.S. House New York District 26 Timothy M. Kennedy Democratic May 6, 2024 January 3, 2027

    State legislative maps

    See also: New York State Senate and New York House of Representatives

    New York comprises 63 state Senate districts and 150 state House districts. State senators and representatives are elected every two years in partisan elections. To access the state legislative district maps approved during the 2020 redistricting cycle, click here.

    Redistricting by cycle

    Redistricting after the 2020 census

    See also: Redistricting in New York after the 2020 census

    New York was apportioned 26 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. This represented a net loss of one seat as compared to apportionment after the 2010 census.[52]

    Enacted congressional district maps

    See also: Congressional district maps implemented after the 2020 census

    Congressional map enacted in 2024

    On February 28, 2024, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed a new congressional map into law. The state Assembly voted 115-35 to approve the map on February 27. The state Senate voted 45-18 to approve the map the same day.[5][6][7]

    According to Nicholar Fandos of The New York Times, "Although a pair of swing districts would become more Democratic, lawmakers in Albany left the partisan makeup of 24 of the state’s 26 districts largely intact. The middle-ground approach reflected a desire to avoid another protracted court fight like the one in New York that helped swing control of the House to Republicans in 2022, while still better positioning Democrats in key districts."[6]

    On December 12, 2023, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, ruled in a 4-3 decision that the independent redistricting commission did not follow the state's congressional redistricting process and ordered the commission to reconvene and re-draw congressional district boundaries by February 28 for use in the 2024 elections.[53] The court's majority opinion stated, "In 2014, the voters of New York amended our Constitution to provide that legislative districts be drawn by an Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC). The Constitution demands that process, not districts drawn by courts. Nevertheless, the IRC failed to discharge its constitutional duty. That dereliction is undisputed. The Appellate Division concluded that the IRC can be compelled to reconvene to fulfill that duty; we agree. There is no reason the Constitution should be disregarded."[54]

    Reactions to 2024 congressional map

    Ed Cox, Chairman of the New York Republican Party, released a statement saying they would not continue their litigation.

    “ Our victory in the Harkenrider case led to fair lines. Despite Democrats’ ongoing corruption of the process, these lines are not materially different from those drawn by the special master. As such, there is no need for further litigation.[55][19] ”

    Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), U.S. House minority leader, released a statement encouraging Gov. Hochul to sign the congressional map that the state legislature passed on February, 28, 2024, into law:

    “ Today, the state legislature has adopted a bipartisan congressional map that more meaningfully delivers the type of fair representation that the people of New York State deserve.

    This map reunites several communities of interest, reduces the number of counties, towns, and villages that are split and promotes compact congressional districts. For these reasons, New Yorkers from every walk of life, race, region, religion, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and ZIP cope can now more fairly determine who should represent them in Congress.[56][19]

    		”

    Below are the congressional maps in effect before and after the 2020 redistricting cycle. The map on the right was in effect for New York’s 2024 congressional elections.

    New York Congressional Districts
    until January 2, 2025

    Click a district to compare boundaries.

    New York Congressional Districts
    starting January 3, 2025

    Click a district to compare boundaries.

    Congressional maps enacted in 2022

    On May 20, 2022, Justice Patrick McAllister ordered the adoption of a new congressional map drawn by redistricting special master Jonathan Cervas.[57] The Associated Press reported that the boundaries that the court enacted "are more favorable to Republicans and more competitive than the previous maps drawn by the Democratically-controlled state Legislature."[58] This map took effect for New York's 2022 congressional elections.

    On March 31, 2022, a lower court judge ruled against New York's congressional map and ordered the legislature to draw a new map that "receive[s] bipartisan support among both Democrats and Republicans in both the senate and assembly.".[59] On April 27, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, affirmed the lower court's ruling overturning the congressional map.[60] House Speaker Carl Heastie (D) and Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D) submitted a map draft to the court's redistricting special master on May 5, but Cervas recommended the court enact a different set of boundaries.[57]

    Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed the state's initial map that the lower court overturned on February 3, 2022.[61] These boundaries were approved by the New York State Senate, 43-20, and by the New York State Assembly 103-45.[62]

    Reactions to the May 20, 2022 enacted map

    In his order, Justice Patrick McAllister wrote, "the court believes the maps remain almost perfectly neutral, meaning the maps do not favor or disfavor any political party."[63] Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York, said, "It's clear he listened to the extensive comments sent to the court, including ours and those of the Unity Maps, as the maps now reflect a deeper understanding of minority and other communities' interests. Ultimately, as he indicates, he valued compactness above all else."[64]

    Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) criticized the map, saying, "the court of appeals was wrong in the decision that they made both on the substance and in terms of turning over redistricting to an out of town, unelected special master and a judicial overseer in Steuben County, who was a Republican."[65] Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) also criticized the map, saying "by splitting [Black] communities, the map further alienates them and perpetuates the opportunity for further historical neglect by the electoral system. [...] Their voting power is directly tied to their lives and they deserve a fair chance at electing representatives that take their unique needs into full consideration."[66]

    Reactions to the February 3, 2022 enacted map

    Following the passage of the map, Hochul said: "These bills are necessary to reapportion districts and to provide certainty and clarity regarding such districts in a timely manner, allowing for efficient administration of the electoral process."[67] Assembly Republican Leader William Barclay criticized the map, saying: "We’re supposed to do it pursuant to the laws in our constitution, and clearly, I think with these congressional lines, I think there is a case for a lawsuit. Ultimately, I think there will be a court that will end up drawing these lines."[61]

    2020 presidential results using the February 3, 2022 congressional map

    The table below details the results of the 2020 presidential election in each district at the time of the 2022 election and its political predecessor district.[68] This data was compiled by Daily Kos Elections.[69]

    2020 presidential results by Congressional district, New York
    District 2022 district Political predecessor district
    Joe Biden Democratic Party Donald Trump Republican Party Joe Biden Democratic Party Donald Trump Republican Party
    New York's 1st 49.5% 49.3% 47.3% 51.5%
    New York's 2nd 48.7% 50.2% 47.4% 51.4%
    New York's 3rd 53.6% 45.4% 54.7% 44.3%
    New York's 4th 56.8% 42.2% 55.6% 43.4%
    New York's 5th 80.9% 18.5% 83.3% 16.2%
    New York's 6th 64.7% 34.4% 61.8% 37.4%
    New York's 7th 80.8% 18.2% 81.8% 17.3%
    New York's 8th 76.3% 23.1% 82.9% 16.5%
    New York's 9th 75.4% 23.9% 81.4% 17.8%
    New York's 10th 85.1% 13.9% 59.6% 39.4%
    New York's 11th 45.7% 53.4% 44.3% 54.8%
    New York's 12th 85.2% 13.8% 76.1% 22.9%
    New York's 13th 88.1% 11.1% 88.1% 11.1%
    New York's 14th 77.9% 21.3% 73.3% 25.9%
    New York's 15th 84.7% 14.7% 86.4% 13.0%
    New York's 16th 71.4% 27.7% 75.3% 23.8%
    New York's 17th 54.5% 44.4% 51.8% 46.8%
    New York's 18th 53.4% 45.0% 84.1% 14.8%
    New York's 19th 51.3% 46.7% 49.8% 48.3%
    New York's 20th 58.6% 39.4% 59.3% 38.7%
    New York's 21st 42.8% 55.2% 43.8% 54.2%
    New York's 22nd 52.6% 45.2% 53.4% 44.4%
    New York's 23rd 40.4% 57.6% 43.3% 54.5%
    New York's 24th 40.3% 57.5% 43.2% 54.7%
    New York's 25th 58.8% 39.1% 60.1% 37.8%
    New York's 26th 60.8% 37.4% 62.6% 35.6%

    Enacted state legislative district maps

    See also: State legislative district maps implemented after the 2020 census

    State legislative maps enacted in 2022-2023

    State Assembly districts
    New York enacted new State Assembly district boundaries on April 24, 2023, when Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed legislation establishing them for use starting with the 2024 elections.[70] The bill adopting the districts passed earlier that day in the State Assembly by a vote of 132-13, and it passed the state Senate by a vote of 59-1.[71][72] The legislation stated, "Vacancies in the Assembly will be filled using existing boundaries until January 1, 2025, at which time vacancies will be filled using the new boundaries."[73]

    The state redrew its Assembly district boundaries in response to a June 10, 2022, decision by the appellate division of the New York Supreme Court in Nichols v. Hochul.[14] That court upheld a lower court ruling that declared the state's Assembly district boundaries invalid but determined that they should still be used for the 2022 legislative elections since the lawsuit challenging them was filed too close to those elections for the courts to intervene.[15] The appellate division ruling determined that the Assembly district map was enacted in violation of the state's constitutional redistricting process and ordered a New York City-based state trial court to oversee the redrawing of boundaries for the 2024 elections.[15] On September 29, 2022, that trial court directed the IRC to "initiate the constitutional process for amending the assembly district map based on the 2020 census data by formulating a proposed assembly map" and submit such a plan to the legislature by April 28, 2023.[74]

    The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) had voted 9-1 on April 20, 2023, to advance this plan and submit it to the legislature with the Commission stating in its cover letter that the plan "garnered the highest number of votes in support" at its meeting on that date.[75][76]

    According to Giulia Heyward and Jon Campbell at Gothamist, the new districts replaced "a nearly identical set of districts that were just put into place for last year’s races before a court threw them out."[77] Heyward and Campbell also wrote that "The commission had originally put forward a draft that would have made considerable changes before settling on a revised proposal last week mirroring the lines already in place."[77]

    Click here to view more information about Assembly districts enacted in 2023, including zoomable maps and links to detailed demographic statistics for each district.'

    State Senate districts
    On May 20, 2022, Justice Patrick McAllister ordered the adoption of a new state senate map drawn by redistricting special master Jonathan Cervas which took effect for New York's 2022 legislative elections.[78] On April 27, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, overturned a decision by the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court which overturned a lower court's ruling invalidating the legislature's state Senate boundaries.[60][79][80][14]

    Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) had signed new state legislative district boundaries into law on February 3, 2022. The New York State Senate voted 43-20 to approve them, and the New York State Assembly approved them 120-27 on the same day.[81][82]

    Reactions to 2023 state Assembly maps

    New York State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie supported the new districts, saying, "I think the [commission] listened to the testimony that was given to them throughout all of the hearings across the state, and I think they came back with a fair map."[83] Betsy Gotbaum, executive director of Citizens Union, criticized the new boundaries as too similar to the ones already in place: "The new Assembly districts approved by the Independent Redistricting Commission are strikingly similar to the districts drawn by the legislature last year...This similarity suggests that the Commission drew the Assembly maps to please lawmakers."[84] Citizens Union describes itself on its website as a group "committed to reforming New York City and State government by fostering transparency, accountability, accessibility, honesty and the highest ethical standards."[85]

    Reactions to 2022 state Senate maps

    Following the passage of the map, Hochul said: "These bills are necessary to reapportion districts and to provide certainty and clarity regarding such districts in a timely manner, allowing for efficient administration of the electoral process." State Republican Party Chairman Nick Langworthy said: "There is a wild, partisan gerrymandering that took place here. It violates the state Constitution, and we’re going to try to get justice."[67]

    Redistricting after the 2010 census

    See also: Redistricting in New York after the 2010 census

    Congressional redistricting, 2010

    Following the 2010 United States Census, New York lost two congressional seats. At the time of redistricting, Democrats controlled the governor's mansion and the New York State Assembly, but Republicans held a majority in the New York State Senate. The legislature proved unable to pass its own congressional redistricting plan. A panel of three federal judges appointed federal magistrate judge Roanne Mann to implement a map. On March 7, 2012, Mann issued her map, which was drawn by Nathaniel Persily, a professor at Columbia Law School.[51][86]

    State legislative redistricting, 2010

    The advisory redistricting commission issued its state legislative district proposal on January 26, 2012. On March 11, 2012, the state legislature approved a revised version of this proposal, which was signed into law by the governor on the same day. Technical corrections to the maps were approved by the legislature on March 15, 2012, and signed into law on March 27, 2012. The maps were subject to litigation; ultimately, however, the maps were upheld.[51]

    State legislation and ballot measures

    Redistricting legislation

    DocumentIcon.jpg See state election laws

    The table below includes bills related to redistricting introduced during (or carried over to) the current session of the New York state legislature. The following information is included for each bill:

    • State
    • Bill number
    • Official bill name or caption
    • Most recent action date
    • Legislative status
    • Sponsor party
    • Topics dealt with by the bill

    Bills are organized by most recent action. The table displays up to 100 results. To view more bills, use the arrows in the upper-right corner. Clicking on a bill will open its page on Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker, which includes bill details and a summary.

    Redistricting ballot measures

    See also: Redistricting measures on the ballot and List of New York ballot measures

    Ballotpedia has tracked the following ballot measure(s) relating to redistricting in New York.

    1. New York Redistricting Commission Amendment, Proposal 1 (2014)
    2. New York Boundaries of Senate Districts, Amendment 4 (1962)
    3. New York Creation of Assembly and Senate Districts, Amendment 4 (1945)
    4. New York Redistricting of Assembly Districts, Amendment 3 (1943)
    5. New York Residence Requirements for Election to the Legislature, Amendment 5 (1943)
    6. New York Abolish of State Census for Legislature Redistricting, Amendment 1 (1931)
    7. New York Proposal 1, Redistricting Changes Amendment (2021)

    Political impacts of redistricting

    Competitiveness

    There are conflicting opinions regarding the correlation between partisan gerrymandering and electoral competitiveness. In 2012, Jennifer Clark, a political science professor at the University of Houston, said, "The redistricting process has important consequences for voters. In some states, incumbent legislators work together to protect their own seats, which produces less competition in the political system. Voters may feel as though they do not have a meaningful alternative to the incumbent legislator. Legislators who lack competition in their districts have less incentive to adhere to their constituents’ opinions."[87]

    In 2006, Emory University professor Alan Abramowitz and Ph.D. students Brad Alexander and Matthew Gunning wrote, "[Some] studies have concluded that redistricting has a neutral or positive effect on competition. ... [It] is often the case that partisan redistricting has the effect of reducing the safety of incumbents, thereby making elections more competitive."[88]

    In 2011, James Cottrill, a professor of political science at Santa Clara University, published a study of the effect of non-legislative approaches (e.g., independent commissions, politician commissions) to redistricting on the competitiveness of congressional elections. Cottrill found that "particular types of [non-legislative approaches] encourage the appearance in congressional elections of experienced and well-financed challengers." Cottrill cautioned, however, that non-legislative approaches "contribute neither to decreased vote percentages when incumbents win elections nor to a greater probability of their defeat."[89]

    In 2021, John Johnson, Research Fellow in the Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education at Marquette University, reviewed the relationship between partisan gerrymandering and political geography in Wisconsin, a state where Republicans have controlled both chambers of the state legislature since 2010 while voting for the Democratic nominee in every presidential election but one since 1988. After analyzing state election results since 2000, Johnson wrote, "In 2000, 42% of Democrats and 36% of Republicans lived in a neighborhood that the other party won. Twenty years later, 43% of Democrats lived in a place Trump won, but just 28% of Republicans lived in a Biden-voting neighborhood. Today, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to live in both places where they are the overwhelming majority and places where they form a noncompetitive minority."[90]

    State legislatures

    See also: Margin of victory in state legislative elections

    In 2014, Ballotpedia conducted a study of competitive districts in 44 state legislative chambers between 2010, the last year in which district maps drawn after the 2000 census applied, and 2012, the first year in which district maps drawn after the 2010 census applied. Ballotpedia found that there were 61 fewer competitive general election contests in 2012 than in 2010. Of the 44 chambers studied, 25 experienced a net loss in the number of competitive elections. A total of 17 experienced a net increase. In total, 16.2 percent of the 3,842 legislative contests studied saw competitive general elections in 2010. In 2012, 14.6 percent of the contests studied saw competitive general elections. An election was considered competitive if it was won by a margin of victory of 5 percent or less. An election was considered mildly competitive if it was won by a margin of victory between 5 and 10 percent. For more information regarding this report, including methodology, see this article.

    In New York, there were four competitive races for the New York House of Representatives in 2012, compared to seven in 2010. There were six mildly competitive House races in 2012, compared to nine in 2010. This amounted to a net loss of six competitive elections.

    Recent news

    The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Redistricting New York. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 All About Redistricting, "Why does it matter?" accessed April 8, 2015
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Indy Week, "Cracked, stacked and packed: Initial redistricting maps met with skepticism and dismay," June 29, 2011
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 The Atlantic, "How the Voting Rights Act Hurts Democrats and Minorities," June 17, 2013
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Redrawing the Lines, "The Role of Section 2 - Majority Minority Districts," accessed April 6, 2015
    5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named nyt1
    6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 The New York Times, "Democrats Propose N.Y. Congressional Map With Slight Tilt in Their Favor," February 27, 2024
    7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Politico, "New congressional maps approved in New York," February 28, 2024
    8. ↑ New York Daily News, "New York’s top court orders House map redrawn," December 12, 2023
    9. ↑ State of New York Court of Appeals, "Opinion No. 90, In the Matter of Anthony S. Hoffmann v. New York State Independent Redistricting Commission," December 12, 2023
    10. ↑ Twitter, "@JonCampbellNY," April 24, 2023
    11. ↑ New York State Assembly, "Bill No. A06586 Summary," accessed April 27, 2023
    12. ↑ New York State Assembly, "4-24-23 SESSION," accessed April 27, 2023
    13. ↑ New York State Assembly, "Bill No. A06586 Summary," accessed April 27, 2023
    14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, Nichols et al., v. Hochul et al. June 10, 2022
    15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 Gothamist, "Court tosses New York’s new Assembly district maps –but not for this year," June 10, 2022
    16. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, "Nichols, et al. v. Hochul, et al.," September 29, 2022
    17. ↑ The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, "Election Regulations," accessed April 13, 2015
    18. ↑ Brookings, "Redistricting and the United States Constitution," March 22, 2011
    19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    20. ↑ Brennan Center for Justice, "A Citizen's Guide to Redistricting," accessed March 25, 2015
    21. ↑ The Constitution of the United States of America, "Article 1, Section 2," accessed March 25, 2015
    22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 22.5 22.6 All About Redistricting, "Where are the lines drawn?" accessed April 9, 2015
    23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 23.3 FairVote, "Redistricting Glossary," accessed April 9, 2015
    24. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Who draws the lines?" accessed June 19, 2017
    25. ↑ Encyclopædia Britannica, "Gerrymandering," November 4, 2014
    26. ↑ Congressional Research Service, "Congressional Redistricting and the Voting Rights Act: A Legal Overview," April 13, 2015
    27. ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Supreme Court to Consider Limits on Partisan Drawing of Election Maps," June 19, 2017
    28. ↑ The Washington Post, "Supreme Court to hear potentially landmark case on partisan gerrymandering," June 19, 2017
    29. ↑ United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Columbia Division, "South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, et al. v. Alexander," January 6, 2023
    30. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Alexander, et al. v. The South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, et al.," February 17, 2023
    31. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP," accessed July 21, 2023
    32. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Justices will hear case that tests power of state legislatures to set rules for federal elections," June 30, 2022
    33. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, “Moore, in his Official Capacity as Speaker of The North Carolina House of Representatives, et al. v. Harper et al.," "Certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina,” accessed June 16, 2023
    34. ↑ SCOTUSblog.org, "Supreme Court upholds Section 2 of Voting Rights Act," June 8, 2023
    35. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Gill v. Whitford: Decision," June 18, 2018
    36. ↑ Election Law Blog, "Breaking: SCOTUS to Hear NC Racial Gerrymandering Case," accessed June 27, 2016
    37. ↑ Ballot Access News, "U.S. Supreme Court Accepts Another Racial Gerrymandering Case," accessed June 28, 2016
    38. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Cooper v. Harris: Decision," May 22, 2017
    39. ↑ The Washington Post, "Supreme Court to hear challenge to Texas redistricting plan," May 26, 2015
    40. ↑ The New York Times, "Supreme Court Agrees to Settle Meaning of ‘One Person One Vote,'" May 26, 2015
    41. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Evenwel v. Abbott," accessed May 27, 2015
    42. ↑ Associated Press, "Supreme Court to hear Texas Senate districts case," May 26, 2015
    43. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission: Brief for Appellants," accessed December 14, 2015
    44. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission," April 20, 2016
    45. ↑ The New York Times, "Court Skeptical of Arizona Plan for Less-Partisan Congressional Redistricting," March 2, 2015
    46. ↑ The Atlantic, "Will the Supreme Court Let Arizona Fight Gerrymandering?" September 15, 2014
    47. ↑ United States Supreme Court, "Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission: Opinion of the Court," June 29, 2015
    48. ↑ The New York Times, "Supreme Court Upholds Creation of Arizona Redistricting Commission," June 29, 2015
    49. ↑ Yale Law School, The Avalon Project, "Voting Rights Act of 1965; August 6, 1965," accessed April 6, 2015
    50. ↑ 51.0 51.1 51.2 51.3 51.4 51.5 All About Redistricting, "New York," accessed May 8, 2015
    51. ↑ United States Census Bureau, "2020 Census Apportionment Results Delivered to the President," April 26, 2021
    52. ↑ New York Daily News, "New York’s top court orders House map redrawn," December 12, 2023
    53. ↑ State of New York Court of Appeals, "Opinion No. 90, In the Matter of Anthony S. Hoffmann v. New York State Independent Redistricting Commission," December 12, 2023
    54. ↑ NYGOP, "Statement from NYGOP Chair Ed Cox on Congressional Maps," February 28, 2024
    55. ↑ X, "RepJeffries," February 28, 2024
    56. ↑ 57.0 57.1 Gothamist, "Court finalizes new NY congressional, state Senate maps," May 21, 2022
    57. ↑ WPIX-11, "New York judge approves new maps for August primaries," May 21, 2022
    58. ↑ Politico, "GOP judge throws out Democrats' redistricting plan in New York, setting up expected appellate fight," March 31, 2022
    59. ↑ 60.0 60.1 The American Redistricting Project, "Harkenrider v. Hochul," April 27, 2022
    60. ↑ 61.0 61.1 WIVB, "Gov. Hochul signs new State and Congressional redistricting maps into law," February 3, 2022
    61. ↑ NBC New York, "NY Legislature Approves New Congressional Maps That Expand Democrats' Influence," February 2, 2022
    62. ↑ New York State Unified Court System, "Decision and Order," accessed May 23, 2022
    63. ↑ Spectrum News 1, "Redistricting could change once again in New York," May 23, 2022
    64. ↑ The Hill, "Jeffries says NY redistricting process was ‘hijacked’ by appeals court," May 22, 2022
    65. ↑ Salon, "N.Y. redistricting chaos leads to Democratic infighting, charges of “thinly veiled racism"," May 20, 2022
    66. ↑ 67.0 67.1 Bloomberg Government, "New York Governor Signs Republican-Hampering Redistricting Plans," February 3, 2022
    67. ↑ Political predecessor districts are determined primarily based on incumbents and where each chose to seek re-election.
    68. ↑ Daily Kos Elections, "Daily Kos Elections 2020 presidential results by congressional district (old CDs vs. new CDs)," accessed May 12, 2022
    69. ↑ Twitter, "@JonCampbellNY," April 24, 2023
    70. ↑ New York State Assembly, "Bill No. A06586 Summary," accessed April 27, 2023
    71. ↑ New York State Assembly, "4-24-23 SESSION," accessed April 27, 2023
    72. ↑ New York State Assembly, "Bill No. A06586 Summary," accessed April 27, 2023
    73. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, "Nichols, et al. v. Hochul, et al.," September 29, 2022
    74. ↑ New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, "Assembly Plan 2023-Vote Tally," accessed April 27, 2023
    75. ↑ New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, "Assembly Plan 2023-Cover Letter," accessed April 27, 2023
    76. ↑ 77.0 77.1 Gothamist, "NY Assembly Map: Meet your new district. Same as the old district.," April 24, 2023
    77. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named adopt
    78. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Apr21ruling
    79. ↑ Politico, "GOP judge throws out Democrats' redistricting plan in New York, setting up expected appellate fight," March 31, 2022
    80. ↑ New York State Senate, "Assembly Bill A9168," accessed February 4, 2022
    81. ↑ New York State Assembly, "A09168," accessed February 4, 2022
    82. ↑ Gothamist, "NY Assembly Map: Meet your new district. Same as the old district.," April 24, 2023
    83. ↑ Queens Chronicle, "Legislature, Hochul OK IRC’s Assembly maps," April 27, 2023
    84. ↑ Citizens Union, "About," accessed April 27, 2023
    85. ↑ Barone, M. & McCutcheon, C. (2013). The almanac of American politics 2014 : the senators, the representatives and the governors : their records and election results, their states and districts. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    86. ↑ The Daily Cougar, "Redistricting will affect November election," October 16, 2012
    87. ↑ The Journal of Politics, "Incumbency, Redistricting, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections," February 2006
    88. ↑ Polity, "The Effects of Non-Legislative Approaches to Redistricting on Competition in Congressional Elections," October 3, 2011
    89. ↑ Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog, "Why Do Republicans Overperform in the Wisconsin State Assembly? Partisan Gerrymandering Vs. Political Geography," February 11, 2021

    v • e

    Election policy
    Election legislationElection Policy on Ballotpedia Logo.png
    Election administration
    Voting policy
    Electoral systems policy
    Primary elections policy
    Redistricting policy
    Recount laws
    Ballot access for
    political candidates
    Ballot access for
    presidential candidates
    Ballot access for
    political parties
    Electoral systems

    v • e

    Ballotpedia
    About
    Editorial Content

    Geoff Pallay, Director of Editorial Content and Editor-in-Chief • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Daniel Anderson, Managing Editor • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor • Cory Eucalitto, Managing Editor • Mandy Gillip, Managing Editor • Doug Kronaizl, Local Elections Project Manager • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Thomas Ellis • Frank Festa • Nicole Fisher • Brianna Hosea • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Jaime Healy-Plotkin • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Nathan Maxwell • Ellie Mikus • Jackie Mitchell • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Maddie Sinclair Johnson • Abbey Smith • Janie Valentine • Joel Williams • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox • Mercedes Yanora

    Flag of New York

    v • e

    State of New York
    Albany (capital)
    Elections

    What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

    Government

    Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy