There appears to be little appetite for compromise as hearings begin Thursday in the appeal of New York’s Congressional redistricting case, despite the example set by Maryland, where a bipartisan deal was struck this week. 

A former member of the House of Representatives who is serving as a spokesman for Republicans in the New York redistricting dispute, John Faso, told the Sun on Wednesday he saw no potential for compromise in the case.

On Monday, the Maryland legislature — controlled by Democrats — reached an agreement with Governor Hogan, a Republican, after Democratic maps in Maryland were invalidated in state court last week. Democrats in Maryland have since dropped their appeal.

In both states, Republicans accused Democrats of drawing electoral maps that featured unconstitutionally Gerrymandered districts that favored one party unfairly. 

The compromise in Maryland is partly due to the divided state government there. By contrast, New York Democrats control both houses of the legislature as well as the governor’s office, meaning that the courts are their only obstacle to making the new map law.

So far, New York’s courts are proving a significant hurdle for Democrats in the state. On March 31, a Supreme Court judge in Steuben County ruled the New York map was an unconstitutional Gerrymander that favored Democrats. An appellate judge will hear arguments in the dispute tomorrow.

New York’s courts are obligated to consider that “our state constitution mandates that districts cannot be drawn to discourage competition, or favor or disfavor particular incumbents, candidates, or parties,” Empire Center analyst Cameron Macdonald told The New York Sun.

This standard was added to the state constitution in 2014 along with the establishment of an Independent Redistricting Commission that was tasked with drawing the state’s maps.

Mr. Macdonald pointed out that the Independent Redistricting Commission earlier this year submitted an “array of fair maps” for the legislature to pick from. However, this is not what happened following the 2020 census.

 The commission, which consisted of representatives of both parties, was unable to reach consensus  on any of the maps that the commission staff had proposed. As a result no maps were successfully  submitted to the legislature and approved. 

When the redistricting commission’s time was up, state legislators took it upon themselves to draw new district maps — now subject to litigation — which were supported only by Democrats.

The maps under litigation create 20 Democratic-leaning seats, two competitive seats, and four Republican seats after accounting for New York’s loss of a single seat to reapportionment.

Currently, New York sends 19 Democrats and eight Republicans to the House, meaning that the new maps, if enacted, could halve New York’s Republican congressional delegation.

The trial court in Steuben County has already determined that whatever map becomes law will require bipartisan support. While this decision could be upheld or overturned, New York legislators could find a compromise at any point, like they did in Maryland. 

This solution would allow New York to avoid increasingly likely delays to primary elections in the state.

Mr. Macdonald added that “the New York redistricting case is like the case in Maryland, where a compromise was reached after elected officials there likely weighed the legal arguments and political consequences.”

The initial Democratic plan in Maryland was to create seven Democratic leaning districts and one competitive district. The compromise plan will create six Democratic-leaning districts, one Republican leaning district, and one competitive district.

“There’s no reason the Legislature can’t adopt fair maps and adjust schedules and petition requirements to make everything work,” Mr. Macdonald concluded.

Yet while there are compromise maps on the table in New York, state officials are currently on track to exhaust their legal options first, even as candidates turn in their petitions to appear on party primary ballots.

As litigation continues Thursday, New York’s new and contested district maps will remain in place for now, as per Monday’s order from Justice Stephen Lindley of New York’s Fourth Appellate Department.

The temporary stay will hold until the Appellate Division issues a decision on the case. Judge Lindley advised his ruling could come by the end of April. Both Democrats and Republicans would be able to appeal his decision to the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court in the state.

All of the seven justices on the court of appeals were appointed by Democrats — six by Governor Cuomo and one by Governor Hochul. 

The judge in Steuben County’s Supreme Court only gave the state legislature until April 11 to redraw New York’s district maps. 

Republicans have previously told the Sun that they expect the trial court’s decision to be upheld on appeal.

The final outcome of New York’s redistricting case could potentially decide the balance of power within the House of Representatives. Democrats hold an 11-seat majority meaning a swing of just six seats could put Republicans in control.

Representatives from New York’s Democratic party have not responded to requests for comments on the redistricting dispute.