On Wednesday, Steve Hilton, a gubernatorial candidate in California and a contributor to Fox News, took a significant legal step by filing a lawsuit against Governor Gavin Newsom. Outside the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Santa Ana, Hilton made his intentions clear: he believes Newsom’s redistricting efforts infringe upon the California Constitution and undermine democratic principles.
In his announcement, Hilton was unwavering in his stance. “I’m filing a lawsuit to stop Gavin Newsom’s grotesque assault on our democracy,” he proclaimed, emphasizing the perceived inequity in how votes would be valued under Newsom’s proposed redistricting plan. According to Hilton, the plan would mean a Democrat’s vote could carry eight times the weight of a Republican’s vote. “This is obscene,” he declared, drawing attention to what he sees as a flagrant disregard for equal representation.
Numbers paint a stark picture. Despite garnering over 6 million votes in a previous election, Republicans managed to secure only 9 of 52 House seats in California. Hilton argues that under Newsom’s new proposal, Republican representation would dwindle to just four congressional districts. “Equal protection means fair value for every vote,” Hilton reiterated, pointing to the imbalance this new scheme would create. “That is not democracy, it is voter suppression.”
The lawsuit targets not only Newsom but also California Secretary of State Shirley Weber. Hilton’s legal argument hinges on the idea that the state’s redistricting plans violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. His brief highlights the legislative process that birthed Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8 (ACA8), which passed last month and sets the stage for a statewide vote on Proposition 50 this November. If approved, this proposition would formally authorize the controversial redistricting maps drawn under Assembly Bill 604.
Hilton’s complaint underscores a critical point: the legislature has not ensured that congressional districts maintain equal populations. He references significant population declines in areas affected by wildfires, notably places like Pacific Palisades and Malibu, suggesting these shifts further complicate fair representation. “Five years after the last census, it is impossible to guarantee equal representation,” Hilton stated, highlighting the urgent need for a fair process.
The California Constitution mandates that redistricting should be carried out by the Citizens Redistricting Commission, specifically in the year following the national census. Hilton’s legal challenge argues that ACA8 does not adequately address this requirement and continues to infringe upon established protocols for districting, potentially diluting the voting power of certain communities.
“This is not about whether you are a Democrat or a Republican,” Hilton said, broadening the scope of the conversation. “It is about whether your vote counts the same as your neighbor’s.” His intent is to rally support, emphasizing that all Californians deserve equal representation, regardless of party affiliation. The upcoming special election this November will be pivotal; should Proposition 50 pass, the implications for the balance of power within California’s congressional delegation could be significant.
In summary, Hilton’s lawsuit against Newsom seeks to confront a major shift in the political landscape of California. Through this legal initiative, Hilton pushes back against what he considers inequitable redistricting, arguing for a system that honors the democratic principle of “one person, one vote.” The outcome of this case may have lasting effects on the political representation for millions of Californians, setting the stage for a contentious battle well beyond the courtroom.
"*" indicates required fields
