The Thomas B. Hofeller gerrymandering files have led to some legal battles raging, with Republicans doing all to have them thrown out of court. Michael Wines has written an interesting new article in the New York Times about the battles around the Thomas B. Hofeller gerrymandering files. Used as evidence to sue for Republican gerrymandering, the Republicans are doing everything to have the files thrown out from court. According to Wines,
At the heart of a decisive court ruling on Tuesday striking down North Carolina’s state legislative maps was evidence culled from the computer backups of the man who drew them: Thomas B. Hofeller, the Republican strategist and master of gerrymandering, who died last year.
Documents from the backups, which surfaced after his death, were also central to the legal battle over adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census. An enormous stash of digital files, covering Mr. Hofeller’s work in almost every state, has yet to be examined.
But in a state court in Raleigh, N.C., another courtroom battle is underway. Its aim is to ensure that those files are never publicly scrutinized.
Republican political figures filed a flurry of motions on Friday in the same court that issued the gerrymandering decision, all seeking to seal or destroy the 75,000-plus files that contain more than 100,000 documents and thousands of maps. Among them were a South Carolina lawyer, Dalton L. Oldham, who was a partner with Mr. Hofeller in a consultancy, Geographic Strategies L.L.C., that advised the Republican Party and party leaders nationwide on redistricting.
See full story here
Deborah S Alexander says
The NY Times’ link – and your [apparently never scrutinized] link to the
” flurry of motions [filed] on Friday” links not to the subset of Motions filed on a Friday in September – but to the entire prior Gerrymandering Trial.
FInding the new Motion and scheduled hearing for the Hofeller matter has been a lengthy and frustrating excercise – leading so far – to nothing relating to the Motion Brief mentioned, nor to the “scheduling” order for opposing briefs – nor to anything that I could locate.
PLEASE ASSIST READERS WITH A MORE SELECTIVE LINK – perhaps consider linking to a PDF copy of the Motion FIling?