Exclusive news reveals a lawsuit aimed at preventing a redistricting amendment from appearing on Maryland’s November ballot. The conservative watchdog group, Oversight Project, filed the complaint in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court. The lawsuit argues that the amendment lacks legality because the deadline for certifying ballot questions in Maryland had already passed by over a month when lawmakers convened a special session to approve it.
Amendment and Lawsuit Details
The amendment, known as HB 2100, proposes changes to the state constitution. It suggests removing state constitutional standards that dictate compactness and boundaries for congressional districts. Some believe it aims to secure an all-Democrat congressional delegation in the state.
The Oversight Project and several Republican lawmakers who filed the lawsuit emphasize the importance of adhering to legal deadlines. Maryland’s July 1 deadline for certifying ballot questions had already expired long before lawmakers discussed the amendment. They claim this oversight nullifies the amendment’s legitimacy.
Legal Arguments
The Oversight Project, which focuses on exposing government and organizational corruption, highlighted a fiscal note from the Department of Legislative Services. It indicated that the deadline for ballot certification had passed and that officials had to publicly share the full text of any proposed constitutional amendment well ahead of Election Day.
During a Senate debate, Democratic state Sen. Cheryl Kagan noted, “There is no time to comply with the plain language of the law with our new law because July 1st is in the rearview mirror.” This statement supports the complaint’s argument regarding the amendment’s untimeliness.
Response from Lawmakers
The Democratic sponsors of HB 2100 initially described the measure as technical. Maryland GOP Delegate Matt Morgan, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, criticized this description. He argued it was an attempt to bypass missed statutory deadlines. Republican Delegate Kathy Szeliga also expressed concerns over the limited time available for lawmakers and the public to assess the amendment.
Szeliga stated, “The public got absolutely no time to look and weigh in on the amended language. So it just reeks of a naked political, partisan power grab on the Democrats’ behalf.”
Purpose and Legal Actions
The lawsuit contends that the amendment seeks to negate the effects of a 2022 state court ruling. This decision stipulated that constitutional standards apply to congressional redistricting, maintaining seven out of eight U.S. House seats for Democrats in Maryland.
Democrat Gov. Wes Moore defends the amendment as a counter to Republican-led redistricting in other states. His office has yet to comment on the lawsuit. The court is being asked to prevent state officials from moving forward with any actions concerning the amendment on the ballot. An expedited review is requested due to the election timeline.
No immediate responses were received from the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, Moore’s office, or the Maryland State Board of Elections.
Trump Administration’s Noncitizen Voter Fraud Investigation Yields Sparse Results 
TruP Border Wall Construction: Controversy and Facts 
Senator Roger Marshall Criticizes Dr. Anthony Fauci Over Vaccine Text Messages 
North Carolina GOP Nominates Jennifer Balkcom for 11th Congressional District 
Impact of Trump’s Immigration Policies on the U.S. Economy and Workforce 
Secretive Plane Switch Ensures Trump’s Safety Amid Threat