Let’s pick up where we left off last week.

The New York state Legislature has redrawn New York’s congressional, state Senate, and state Assembly district boundaries.

As in recent decades, the majority party in the state Senate and the majority party in the state Assembly have put their collective heads together and had their way.

The big difference between then and now is that one party has the majority in both the Senate and the Assembly.

Although it’s likely that – given an opportunity – some in whichever political party holds the reins would try to put incumbents from other parties, or challengers from other parties, at a disadvantage, Democrats hold the reins now, and Republicans have filed a state-court challenge.

One reported Republican assertion is that districts violate the state Constitution, so let’s see what part of the state Constitution says.

Article III, Section 4(c) provides: “Subject to the requirements of the federal constitution and statutes and in compliance with state constitutional requirements, the following principles shall be used in the creation of state senate and state assembly districts and congressional districts: …

“(4) Each district shall be as compact in form as practica(l).

“(5) Districts shall not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties. …”

Whatever else Republicans assert in their challenge, they have good points under this section.

Please consider the four congressional districts in the westernmost part of New York.

There are multiple ways to redraw them sensibly. Last September, this column explained one way.

However, the state Legislature at most redrew two of the four sensibly. These two include Buffalo and nearby territory, and Rochester and nearby territory.

Apart from whether these two districts are sensibly redrawn, each favors Democrats and has an incumbent Democrat in territory that the incumbent, for the most part, already represents.

As for the other two districts:

¯ A northern district extends from Niagara and northern Erie counties to Jefferson County, on Lake Ontario’s eastern shore, and

¯ A southern district extends from Chautauqua and southern Erie counties east to Chenango County, northeast of Binghamton.

It doesn’t take an election-law genius to look at a map and see that under Article III, Section 4(c)(4), these districts, and others across the state, aren’t “as compact in form as practica(l).”

The next person in line at the grocery store should be able to see this. This isn’t difficult. This isn’t difficult at all.

Apart from whether these two districts are sensibly redrawn, each favors Republicans. Although the Republican now representing much of the territory in the redrawn northern district is seeking re-election, the state Legislature has drawn his residence out of the northern district. Meanwhile, the redrawn southern district has a resident incumbent Republican, yet he’s standing down.

And there’s more: The easternmost part of the redrawn southern district has an engaging, likeable, conservative, incumbent Republican who is seeking re-election.

But guess what?

The state Legislature has drawn her residence out of the southern district and into the North Country district, which also favors Republicans and most of which is represented by another incumbent Republican who is seeking re-election.

These three districts are the reddest in New York.

Hmmm.

Has what’s going on here come into focus?

Either way, please consider this: Does these three districts’ being so red do the New York GOP a favor? Paradoxically, no. Why not? Because this is part of a pattern of redrawn districts all across New York. Democrats have (1) significantly tilted some districts toward Democrats and (2) packed many Republicans into some other districts. Overall, this has the effect of increasing Democrats’ chances and reducing Republicans’ chances of electing members of Congress from New York until 2032.

Under Article III, Section 4(c)(5), however, Republicans would need to show not only effect but also intent: Republicans would need to show that the districts were “drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties.”

Given (1) and (2) – plus (3) the unwieldy nature of some districts, including the large northern, southern, and North Country districts – this shouldn’t be difficult to show.

Thus, under either Section 4(c)(4) or 4(c)(5), Republicans should be able to show that new districts violate the state Constitution.

Now let’s see what state courts say.

With his wife-to-be at his side, Randy Elf explored seeking to be a New York attorney-general candidate in the 2018 general election.

COPYRIGHT ç 2022 BY RANDY ELF