The HLS Clinic In the Middle Of Wisconsin’s Redistricting Fight

In a small office on the fourth floor of Wasserstein Hall, a group of Harvard Law students spend their hours between classes analyzing fragmented maps of Wisconsin’s congressional districts.

The students, members of Harvard Law School’s Election Law Clinic, have joined a coalition of law firms challenging the state’s congressional map, arguing that it locks in incumbents and denies voters a real choice at the ballot box.

Fresh off a victory at the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Clark v. Wisconsin Elections Commission — a case that struck down the state legislative maps — the Clinic is advancing a new theory of “anti-competitive gerrymandering,” that contends that Democrats and Republicans have worked together to carve out the state’s electoral districts to protect incumbents and maintain the party ratio in the legislature.

“The clinic’s real value is bringing a novel theory, basically the congressional delegation is an anti-competitive gerrymander,” Samuel Davis, one of the Clinic’s attorneys said. “The parties have come to an agreement to try and insulate their members from competitive races.”

The Clinic’s work comes amid a wave of redistricting battles unfolding across the country ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. President Donald Trump had directed the Texas legislature to redistrict to add five more Republican seats in the House, but the proposed maps were blocked by a federal judge on Tuesday. The legislature has submitted an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. California — the most populous Democrat-led state — also redrew its own map to counteract Texas’ redistricting effort, though it’s unclear whether the state will go ahead with the plans.

“If the Supreme Court doesn’t step in to police partisan gerrymandering, you will see a festival of copycat gerrymandering — the likes of which this country has never seen,” Ruth Greenwood, the Clinic’s director and an HLS assistant clinical professor, said.

In Wisconsin, there are eight congressional districts, represented by six Republicans and two Democrats, even though 37 percent of Wisconsin residents are registered Republicans, compared to 31 percent Democrats. The map was adopted in 2022 by the Wisconsin State Supreme Court, a then-conservative majority, and has since been maintained by both parties to protect incumbent seats, according to the Wisconsin-based nonprofit Law Forward.

The Election Law Clinic became involved in Wisconsin redistricting through research on measuring political fairness by HLS professor Nick Stephanopoulos, the Clinic’s Director of Strategy and Greenwood’s husband, leading to Whitford v. Gill, a partisan gerrymandering case that went to the Supreme Court in 2018. Since then, the Clinic has continued to help with redistricting cases.

The Clinic joined on-the-ground advocacy groups, including Law Forward, to file a complaint to the Wisconsin Supreme Court challenging the congressional districts in the state. Then, leading up to the suit, Law Forward obtained evidence for redrawing both the state legislative map and congressional districts from 2011, showing that Republicans and Democrats collaborated to change district lines to make sure incumbents could get reelected.

The Clinic and Law Forward argue that Republicans and Democrats cooperated to create “safe congressional districts for their parties,” engaging in anti-competitive gerrymandering, according to Law Forward Co-Founder Doug Poland.

In two cases currently before Wisconsin courts, the Clinic and Law Forward are currently using the theory to challenge the state’s congressional map. The groups hope to establish politically neutral district lines in the state.

Greenwood explained that the Clinic brings “academic novelty” to work they hope can support democracy, bringing ideas from academic research into the courtroom. Students involved in the Clinic help with litigation, drafting policy briefs, and conducting research for the cases.

“It gives us an opportunity to contribute to something that’s really going to impact people’s ability to participate in democracy,” Louis E. Goldsmith, a 3L at the Clinic, said. “The right to vote is one of the fundamental rights this nation is built on.”

—Staff writer Sidhi Dhanda can be reached at sidhi.dhanda@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @sidhidhanda.

—Staff writer Caroline G. Hennigan can be reached at caroline.hennigan@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @cghennigan.