Plaintiffs planning to appeal judge’s ruling on SLO County redistricting

February 13, 2022

By KAREN VELIE

A group focused on overturning the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors’ vote to redraw the county’s five supervisorial districts is planning to appeal a failed motion for a temporary restraining order.

Even though there are people on both sides of the redistricting battle, primarily Democratic voters want to revert back to the old map that Republicans argue supports Democrats. Democratic voters contend the new map benefits the Republican Party at the expense of Democrats and Latinos.

Superior Court Judge Rita Federman rejected the bulk of the plaintiffs’ arguments, which included that the adopted map diminishes Latino voters, that cities are not communities of interest and that the new map illegally took away the right of some to vote in the 2022 election.

Judge Federman found plaintiffs’ argument that the county should have looked at evidence that the adopted map favored or discriminated against a political party, accurate, though procedural.

While the plaintiffs and the Tribune claim the map was clearly drawn to harm or benefit a party, a key component of their argument, the judge did not agree.

While it is illegal to draw a district to favor or disfavor a political party, “the mere fact that a particular reapportionment may result in a shift in political control of some legislative districts … falls short of demonstrating such a purpose,” according to the ruling.

The courts generally fast track lawsuits and appeals dealing with redistricting. However, with the nomination period for supervisorial candidates opening on Monday morning, the appeal cannot be filed before candidates can register to run for office making it less likely the appeal will be successful.


Loading...

5
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
Boldguy

Sore losers!!!


Mitch C

The Tribune is so far left they are in the bleachers. As far as the Tribune goes, the fat girl has sung and it is time to close up shop for good. Once was a valuable community asset has become a useless shadow of itself that needs to go away.


kayaknut

Jimmy Paulding has a lot invested in this lawsuit, he can’t just let it go away.


Mitch C

Paulding is for Paulding … a vote for him is a wasted vote.


commonsenseguy

I agree. He’s slick and stealth. But his dirty swell in this gives him away.