New York

As of 2014, New York’s congressional and state legislative lines are drawn primarily by a 10-person independent commission, at least in the first instance.  Each of the four legislative leaders (majority and minority leader in each legislative chamber) chooses 2 commissioners; those 8 commissioners choose 2 others who have not been registered Democrats or Republicans for the last 5 years.  No commissioner may have been, within three years prior to appointment, a state official, employee, or party chair, member of Congress, New York lobbyist, or the spouse of a statewide elected official or federal or state legislator.  Members of the commission should reflect the diversity of New York residents “with regard to race, ethnicity, gender, language, and geographic residence,” to the extent practicable.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, §§ 4(b), 5-b(a)-(c)]

The ten commissioners are listed here.

Voting rules are based on political party control of the legislature.  When the state Senate and Assembly are controlled by the same party — as they were in 2021 and 2022 — commission approval of a map requires 7 votes, including one commissioner appointed by each legislative leader.  If no map reaches this threshold, the commission will forward to the legislature the map with the most support on the commission. [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 5-b(f)-(g)]

The legislature has two opportunities to accept or reject commission recommendations without modification — with voting rules based on party control as well.  When the state Senate and Assembly are controlled by the same party, votes to approve a map must get 2/3 support in each chamber.  After rejecting two commission maps, but only after rejecting two commission maps, the legislature may substitute its own amended map: it is likely that the law requires a 2/3 majority for this final map as well, though there is some ambiguity about whether this third substitute requires only a regular simple majority.   [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(b); Hoffman v. N.Y. State Ind. Redistricting Comm’n, 2023 WL 8590407 (N.Y. Dec. 12, 2023)]  By statute, legislative amendments may not modify a commission map by more than 2% of any district’s population; that requirement was superseded, but not repealed, by the 2024 districting legislation. [2012 N.Y. Sess. L. ch. 17 (S6736), § 3; 2024 N.Y. Sess. L. ch. 92 (S.8653a), § 2(a)]

New York state trial courts have jurisdiction to review challenges to state legislative lines filed in state court; the courts must render a decision within sixty days after a petition is filed.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 5]

The commission must submit congressional and state legislative maps to the legislature no later than Jan. 15, 2022.  If that plan is not accepted by the legislature, the commission must submit new maps within 15 days of the rejection, and no later than Feb. 28, 2022.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(b)]  Candidates must file for congressional and state legislative primary elections by Apr. 7, 2022. [N.Y. Elec. Law §§ 6-158(1), 8-100(1)]

The New York constitution prohibits redrawing congressional and state legislative lines mid-decade, before the next Census, but the commission may be convened to redraw temporary lines imposed by a court. [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(e); Hoffman v. N.Y. State Ind. Redistricting Comm’n, 2023 WL 8590407 (N.Y. Dec. 12, 2023)]

State law requires the commission to conduct hearings on proposed plans in Albany, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, and White Plains, in each of the five boroughs of New York City, and in each of the counties of Long Island.  The commission must make its draft plans and data publicly available at least 30 days before the first hearing, and no later than Sept. 15, 2021.   [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(c)]

Submissions and hearings from the 2020 cycle are available here; commission meetings are available here.

Like all states, New York must comply with constitutional equal population requirements; the New York constitution further provides that districts should contain an equal number of inhabitants, “as nearly as may be” “to the extent practicable.”  The commission must provide a specific explanation for any district that deviates from this requirement, and deviations will not be lawful at all if established for impermissible reasons.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(c)(2); Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346, 363 (2004), aff’d 543 U.S. 997; In re Orans, 15 N.Y.2d 339 (1965)]  New York will adjust census data for state legislative districts in order to count incarcerated individuals at their last known residence before incarceration.  [N.Y. Legis. L. § 83-M(13)(b)]

New York must also, like all states, abide by the Voting Rights Act and constitutional rules on race.  State law also independently prohibits drawn with the purpose or result of denying or abridging racial or language minority voting rights, and requires that districts be drawn so that racial or minority language groups do not have less opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(c)(1)]

New York law also requires that congressional and state legislative districts be continguous and as compact in form “as practicable,” and the commission must consider maintaining the cores of existing districts, preserving counties, cities, and towns, and protecting communities of interest.  Districts may not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring candidates or parties.  [N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(c)(3)-(6); Harkenrider v. Hochul, 197 N.E.3d 437 (N.Y. 2022)]

After the 2010 cycle, New York changed its process, putting an independent commission in charge of congressional and state legislative lines, subject to modification by a supermajority of the state legislature.  The process gave the legislature opportunities to accept or reject two commission recommendations without modification — with voting rules based on party control.  When the state Senate and Assembly were controlled by the same party, votes to approve a map needed a 2/3 support in each chamber.  After rejecting two commission maps, the legislature could substitute its own amended map.

Voters rejected a 2021 ballot measure to modify the process, including changes to the commission’s voting rules and to the voting rules of the legislature in approving or modifying a commission proposal.  But on Nov. 24, 2021, the Governor signed legislation (S.7150/A.7948) purporting to allow the legislature to draw maps if the commission entirely failed to produce one of the two required maps.

After the ten commission members were appointed, one of the commissioners sued the state over the commission’s staffing and funding, but has not followed through on the suit.

Ultimately, the New York commission could not agree on a congressional or state legislative plan, and on Jan. 3, 2022, instead submitted two plans to the legislature, which the legislature rejected.  When the commission was unable to propose a second round of plans, the legislature passed a congressional plan (S.8172A and S.8196/A.9039A and A.9167) and state legislative plans (S.8185A and S. 8197/A.9040A and A.9168) on  Feb. 3, 2022, signed by the governor on the same day.

All of the plans were challenged in court.  On Apr. 27, 2022, the state supreme court invalidated the legislative process short-circuiting a second commission map (and additionally struck the state’s congressional maps as a partisan gerrymander).  On May 21, 2022, a court ordered special-master-drawn congressional and state Senate maps for the 2022 elections.  After separate litigation over the congressional map, the state supreme court required the commission to submit new plans to the legislature.  The commission submitted new congressional plans to the legislature on Feb. 15, 2024, which the legislature rejected (S.8639/A.9304) on Feb. 26, 2024; on Feb. 28, 2024, the legislature passed its own congressional plan (S.8653A/A.9310A), which the governor signed the same day.  [Harkenrider v. Hochul, 197 N.E.3d 437 (N.Y. 2022); Harkenrider v. Hochul, No. E2022-0116CV (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Steuben Cnty. May 21, 2022); Hoffman v. N.Y. State Ind. Redistricting Comm’n, 2023 WL 8590407 (N.Y. Dec. 12, 2023)]

The state Senate plans drawn by the special master have not been subject to further challenge.

The state Assembly plans were challenged on the same procedural grounds, but that challenge came too late for the 2022 elections.  In 2023, the state’s commission was ordered to submit new state Assembly plans to the legislature.  The commission submitted new Assembly plans to the legislature on Apr. 20, 2023, which the legislature passed (S.6454/A.6586) and governor signed on Apr. 24, 2023.  [Nichols v. Hochul, No. 2022-02301 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div. 1st Dept. June 10, 2022); Nichols v. Hochul, 212 A.D.3d 529 (2023)]

Maps are available here.

In the 2010 cycle, Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn), and New York (Manhattan) counties were subject to preclearance under the federal Voting Rights Act.

New York’s legislature did not agree on a congressional plan, and so the process turned to the courts.  A federal court drew congressional maps on Mar. 19, 2012.  [Favors v. Cuomo, No. 1:11-cv-05632, 2012 WL 928223 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2012)]

The legislature did pass a state legislative plan (S.6696/A.9525) on Mar. 15, 2012, which was signed by the governor on the same day. On Mar. 21, 2012, the legislature passed technical corrections (S.6755) that were signed on Mar. 27, 2012.  The Senate plan was precleared on Apr. 27, 2012; the Assembly plan was precleared on May 18, 2012.

The state Senate and Assembly maps were both challenged in court; both were upheld.  [Favors v. Cuomo, No. 1:11-cv-05632, 2014 WL 2154871 (E.D.N.Y. May 22, 2014); Cohen v. Cuomo, 969 N.E.2d 754 (N.Y. 2012); Little v. N.Y. State Task Force on Demographic Research and Apportionment, No. 2310-2011 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Albany Cnty. Dec. 1, 2011)]

Materials are available here; maps are available here.

In the 2000 cycle, Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn), and New York (Manhattan) counties were subject to preclearance under the federal Voting Rights Act.

New York’s legislature enacted a congressional plan (S.7536), which was signed on June 5, 2002, and precleared on June 25, 2002.  It also enacted a state legislative plan (S.6796), which was signed on April 22, 2002 (amended by S.7300 on April 24, 2002), and precleared on June 17, 2002.

The state Senate and congressional plans were challenged in federal court, and the state Senate plan was challenged in state court. Both plans were upheld. [Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346 (2004), aff’d 543 U.S. 997; Allen v. Pataki, Case No. 101712-2002 (N.Y. Supreme Ct. May 9, 2002)]

Materials are available here; maps are available here.