The South Carolina Supreme Court determined that claims of partisan gerrymandering posed a non-justiciable political question. League of Women Voters South Carolina v. Alexander, 921 S.E.2d 660, 664 (S.C. 2025). The court articulated a two-part test that requires the court to “determine whether (1) any provision pertains to partisan gerrymandering and (2) if so, whether the Plan violates such provision” by “determining whether any of these constitutional provisions provide ‘satisfactory criteria’ or ‘judicially discoverable and manageable standards’ for adjudicating claims of partisan gerrymandering in South Carolina.” Id. at 668. The court held that partisan gerrymandering claims fail on the first part of the test because “South Carolina has no statutes or constitutional provisions that pertain to, prohibit, or limit partisan gerrymandering” and the “absence of such provisions is fatal to [plaintiff’s] claim.” Id. at 670.
Plaintiffs brought claims under the state constitution’s Free and Open Elections Clause, Equal Protection Clause, Free Speech Clause, and two provisions describing the treatment of counties as election districts. The court held that none of these clauses prohibited partisan gerrymandering. Furthermore, the court held that even if the Free and Open Elections Clause were interpreted in such a way as to prohibit or limit partisan gerrymandering, it “would necessarily lead to an abjectly unworkable court-sponsored standard,” leading claims to fail on the second part of the test. Id. at 671.