The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The Voting Rights Act Asymmetry Splices Staten Island
In New York City, Republicans are the discrete and insular minority.
Staten Island was a curious place to grow up. Though it is one of the five boroughs of New York, culturally, it felt very different. And politically, it is a different world. Staten Island has consistently voted for Trump and other Republican candidates, even as the rest of New York sprints down the road to Democratic Socialism serfdom.
From a perspective of geography, Staten Island is also unique. There are several bridges that connect Staten Island: three go to New Jersey, and one, the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge, goes to Brooklyn. (Fun fact: you only pay the toll when you enter Staten Island, not when you leave.) The Staten Island Ferry connects Staten Island with lower Manhattan. (There are some other smaller ferries that connect to different piers in Manhattan.)
How should congressional representation for Staten Island work? Well, its population is not high enough to justify its own district. So for the past four decades, Staten Island's congressional district has included parts of Brooklyn (mostly Bay Ridge). That move made sense as a matter as geography, as it was the only contiguous land mass that Staten Island was connected to.
But Marc Elias had other ideas. As I wrote in October, Elias filed suit in state court, arguing that New York's maps dilute the votes of black and Hispanic voters in Staten Island. Elias argues this dilution violates the New York Voting Rights Act. His preferred map would form a single congressional district out of Staten Island and parts of lower Manhattan, including the financial district and the West Village. Again, there is no contiguous natural or manmade connection between Staten Island and Manhattan. There is only a ferry service that travels between the spots. (You can also take a lengthy bus ride that goes through Brooklyn or New Jersey.)
Of course, the upshot of this suit is that the only Republican district in New York City would vanish. This is the Voting Rights Asymmetry. The law only helps Democrats at the expense of Republicans. None of these regimes are about racial discrimination, especially in a deep blue state that will likely never elect another Republican statewide in my lifetime.
Alas, a trial court has agreed with Elias's case. The Wall Street Journal has this editorial, titled Democrats Try to Steal Staten Island.
Justice Pearlman cites figures showing that Staten Island has become more diverse since 1980. Then it was 85% white. Today it's 57% white, 20% Latino, 9% black and 12% Asian, he says. A provision to the New York constitution, passed by amendment in 2014, requires drawing districts so that minority groups, "based on the totality of the circumstances," do not "have less opportunity" to choose representatives.
The constitution provides "no guidance" on what this is supposed to mean in real life, Justice Pearlman writes, so it falls on him to "establish a standard." He cites an expert witness who says that in federal, state and city elections from 2017-24, the district's black voters stuck together 91% of the time, and Latinos did 88%. Under the current House map, they're "essentially guaranteed to have their votes diluted," the judge says. Therefore he orders the state to redo the lines.
There is a simple truth here. In New York City, black and Hispanic voters are not politically powerless. Indeed, even if certain residents of Staten Island cannot elect the representative of their choice, their policies are adequately protected by the entire New York congressional delegation. On the other hand, Republican voters are a discrete and insular minority. They have no other representation outside of the Staten Island district.
It is difficult to describe what it is like to be a conservative in New York City. At present, I live in a blue city in a red state. Democrats in Houston fare just fine, control most of the local government, and effectively fight most intrusions by the state. But a red borough in a blue state is a different story. The conservatives on Staten Island are truly on an island alone. They have no way to affect local policy, with regard to education or social services. And they have no way to affect state-wide policy.
This is an issue that I have long given thought. Back in 1994, when I was in the fourth grade, I argued that Staten Island should secede from New York City. I found this clipping from the Staten Island Advance from February 19, 1994, which was shortly after Mayor Rudy Giuliani began his first term.
They know that secession would mean Staten Island becomes its own city, and would not be a part of New York City any more. They also talk about what would happen if we do secede. A teacher, Sheena McGowan, talked about it with her class at PS 42 in Eltingville yesterday. She said that if Staten Island becomes its own city, all the open lots "would be owned by us." Then, New York City couldn't cut down the trees and put up buildings. Some students do not think secession is a good idea. They wonder if Staten Island will be able to pay for all the police trucks and fire trucks the borough will have to buy. Others think that taxes might cost more, and more people will be poor. In some classes, students collected newspaper articles and gave speeches. Joshua Blackman gave a speech saying he thought secession was a good idea. He told his class that Staten Island would be divided into 15 districts, so that every neighborhood will be represented. Michelle Cammarota agreed. She said a city of Staten Island would be a "big, clean, caring place." She also said she "would plant two to three trees for every one that was cut down." New plans for Staten Island Borough President Guy V. Molinari told residents yesterday about some of the new things that will happen on Staten Island this year. Molinari said even though he likes Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, he still wants Staten Island to become its own city, or secede. The new mayor is really helping out the Island now, but Molinari said Giuliani won't always be the mayor.
Some things never change. You can see my focus was on representing the varied neighborhoods of Staten Island, and not trees. (I shared many other clippings back in 2010.)
One of my blue sky constitutional amendments would be to allow all the people to redraw their political boundaries in a jubilee year. I discussed it in this post from January 2025:
Fourth, I've long thought about a constitutional amendment that would allow the people to redraw the state boundaries everyone so often by popular referendum. The states would be required to accept incoming property and to surrender outgoing property. The number of states would have to remain fixed, and the moves would have to be contiguous. But the people, perhaps on a county-by-county basis, can jump around. Consider a few examples. My home town of Staten Island could vote to join New Jersey. Eastern Washington and Oregon could vote to join Idaho. Northern and Eastern California could join Nevada (California would stretch from Sacramento to San Diego). Northern Virginia could join Maryland. El Paso could leave Texas and join New Mexico. The Florida Panhandle could join Alabama. The people of upstate New York can join Vermont. The Upper Peninsula of Michigan could join Wisconsin (and generation of Michiganders would no longer have to demonstrate where they live by holding out their hands). Western New York could join Pennsylvania. Philadelphia could join Delaware to basically become its own state. Some parts of Western Pennsylvania could join Ohio. And Northern Maryland could join Pennsylvania--rejigger the Mason-Dixon line. Maybe the state of Alberta could be stretched out to reach Alaska! This proposal would allow people to join states that more closely align with their values. Red states would become redder, blue states would become bluer, and purple states would be harder to find.
Were Staten Island to become part of New Jersey, the Garden State would immediately become purple.
