In a democracy, there is no more fundamental question than how the people conduct their elections. From the founding to the present, partisan gerrymandering has been an ever-present burr in the nation’s side as it struggled to answer that question. It is as universally reviled by the populace as it is embraced by their representatives. And it is not a one-party issue. Gerrymandering has irreparably harmed voters across the political spectrum. Republicans in blue states and Democrats in red states are united in their frustration. But despite this shared anger among the American people, gerrymandering has remained a stubbornly undeniable fact of the country’s political life. This Note explores the history of gerrymandering and proffered solutions, and then proposes using the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to discipline attorneys for their role in perpetuating it. 

Part II of this Note explains briefly how and why the Court got out of the business of partisan gerrymandering. Part III assesses some of the most prominent solutions that the states have adopted and reviews some of the obstacles, like defensive state legislatures and mercurial state and federal courts, that continue to hamper real reform. Part IV discusses the difficulties involved in applying ethics rules to government attorneys, and proposes several model rules that either already apply, or should be applied, to practicing attorneys to create real consequences for those who engage in gerrymandering.

Keep Reading