FILE - Ohio House Speaker Bob Cupp, R-Lima, left, and state Sen. Vernon Sykes, D-Akron, discuss details of the Ohio Redistricting Commission's plans for a new legislative district map, Aug. 31, 2021, in Columbus, Ohio. The Ohio Supreme Court has in a 4-3 ruling, Wednesday, May 25, 2022, rejected another round of Republican-drawn Statehouse maps and returned them to the Ohio Redistricting Commission. (AP Photo/Andrew Welsh-Huggins, File)

For the fifth time, the Ohio Supreme Court rejected state legislative maps proposed by the state redistricting commission, but a federal court will impose them later this week.

The maps rejected by the court Wednesday by a 4-3 vote was identical to the third maps it ruled unconstitutional March 16.

Republicans on the redistricting commission said when they voted in favor of those unconstitutional maps again on May 5 that there wasn’t enough time to create new districts for an Aug. 2 ballot.

Republicans had little incentive to approve new maps as a three-member federal judicial panel said if the commission and court couldn’t agree on new ones by Saturday, it would impose the third maps for this year’s election.

In the Supreme Court’s decision, it acknowledged the federal panel was going to adopt the third set of maps that it had rejected March 16.

But it added: “Neither the current election deadlines, the General Assembly’s inability or unwillingness to alter those deadlines nor the question whether the map would be a viable option for use in the 2022 election cycle prevented the commission from adopting a new, constitutional district plan.”

The Ohio Supreme Court also Wednesday rejected requests from plaintiffs in the case to have hearings for members of the commission to show why they should not be held in contempt of court. That vote was unanimous with Justice Pat DeWine, a son of Gov. Mike DeWine, a commission member, recusing himself. Both DeWines are Republicans and are seeking re-election this year.

The court ordered the commission to adopt new state legislative maps by June 3.

State Sen. Vernon Sykes, D-Akron, the commission’s co-chairman, said: “Ohioans don’t have state legislative maps that comply with our constitution. I am committed to meeting the court’s June 3 deadline.”

But with the federal court announcing April 20 it planned to implement the third set of maps no later than Saturday and the state high court declining to hold the commission in contempt, there is no incentive for commission members to reconvene by the June 3 deadline.

These maps will be in place for this year’s state legislative elections. Races for state Legislature — and state central committee members, which are based on those districts — were not on the May 2 primary ballot as a constitutional map wasn’t in place.

The cost of a second primary is about $20 million to $25 million, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican commission member, has said.

The commission eventually will create maps for 2024 elections, but there is no rush. Also, Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican who’s been the swing vote on all five 4-3 decisions, leaves the Supreme Court bench at the end of this year.

O’Connor and the three Democratic justices have rejected the five sets of state legislative maps as well as a congressional map saying they’re gerrymandered to unfairly favor Republicans. The three other Republican justices have been in the minority on every ruling.

In a concurring decision Wednesday, O’Connor wrote that “With the reassurance provided by a federal district court … that continuing delays and inaction would be rewarded with the implementation of a previous rejected map (the) commission has, contrary to this court’s clear order, resubmitted an unconstitutional General Assembly-district plan and, in doing so, has engaged in a stunning rebuke of the rule of law.”

O’Connor wrote “the commission’s lack of action” is “in direct defiance of its constitutional duties and this court’s four prior judgments.”

O’Connor also wrote that the federal court’s Saturday deadline “effectively instructed the Republican members of the commission that all they had to do to get their way was to wait out the clock.”

Justice Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat running for chief justice this year, wrote that “the latest actions by the commission make clear that without the federal court’s April 20 opinion, there might have been a chance at getting Ohioans a fair map.”

The Supreme Court had ordered the commission, which has five Republican members and two Democrats, to draw maps that reflect the partisan statewide voting trends of the past decade. That would be 54 percent Republican to 46 percent Democratic.

These maps, which were approved by a 4-3 vote — Auditor Keith Faber, a Republican, joined the two Democrats in opposition, but did so saying the maps were unfair to Republicans — reflected those percentages.

But 26 of the districts were drawn to favor Democrats by no more than three percent and all of the Republican districts favor that party by at least five percent with only four by less than 10 percent.

In a dissenting opinion Wednesday, Justice Sharon Kennedy, a Republican running for chief justice this year, wrote: “The redistricting process was hijacked by a majority of this court — a majority that chose to ignore this court’s constitutional role, unmoor itself from the plain language of the Ohio Constitution and name itself the final arbiter of electoral fairness, including how Democratic-leaning a legislative seat must be to be chalked up as a Democratic win even though that is not a requirement” of the state constitution.

She added that the court’s majority “has assigned itself an all-powerful role as a super-commission with veto power over an adopted plan and the authority to rewrite the Ohio Constitution.”

Kennedy also wrote, “The people of Ohio need look no further than this court for the sole cause of the debacle of the missing primary,” and that O’Connor “despises the supermajority of Republicans in the General Assembly and has sought to break it up through this series of cases.”

With the federal court’s involvement, Kennedy wrote it wasn’t “truly stunning that the commission would readopt a district plan that a federal court has already deemed worthy of establishing legislative districts.”

Justice Pat DeWine concurred with Kennedy’s dissent.

State Rep. Jeff Crossman of Parma, the Democratic nominee for attorney general, said he filed a criminal complaint against the Republican members of the commission claiming dereliction of duty.

VALLEY DISTRICTS

When the federal court approves the maps,the 33rd Senate District will include all of Mahoning, Columbiana and Carroll counties and favor Republicans by about 9.5 percent, according to partisan statewide voting trends during the past decade. The current district includes all of Mahoning and Columbiana counties.

The 58th House District, which would favor Democrats by less than 1 percent, would include Austintown, Boardman, Canfield, Berlin, Milton, Jackson, Craig Beach, Struthers, Campbell and Lowellville.

The new 59th House District, which would favor Democrats by about 3 percent, would include Youngstown, Coitsville, Ellsworth, Poland, Sebring, New Middletown, North Lima, Smith, Goshen, Green, Beaver and Springfield along with four townships in northwestern Columbiana County.

The 32nd Senate District would include all of Trumbull and Ashtabula counties and a section of Geauga County. The district, which is largely the same as the existing one,would be a safe Republican district, favoring that party by more than 10 percent, according to voting trends.

A new 64th House District, which would favor Democrats by almost 10 percent, includes all of Warren, Girard, Liberty, Niles, Hubbard, Vienna, Howland, McDonald and Weathersfield.

The rest of Trumbull County, along with a large portion of Ashtabula County, would be in a solid Republican 65th House District, favoring that party by about 23 percent.

dskolnick@vindy.com

dskolnick@tribtoday.com