Redistricting in Maryland
Energy • Environment • Fracking • Public education • School choice • Higher education • Public pensions • State budget • Taxes • Voting • Ballot access • Redistricting
|Note: Redistricting takes place every ten years after completion of the United States Census. The information here pertains to the 2010 redistricting process.|
|Redistricting in Maryland|
|Deadline:||1st Day of 2012 Session|
|Redistricting in other states|
|Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming|
|• Redistricting on Policypedia |
• State legislative and congressional redistricting after the 2010 Census
• State-by-state redistricting procedures
- 1 Process
- 2 Leadership
- 3 2010 Census results
- 4 Congressional maps
- 4.1 Initial Speculation: Democrats may weaken Republican seats
- 4.2 Fifth Congressional District Most Overpopulated
- 4.3 GOP Alternative Redistricting Plan
- 4.4 Democratic Alternative Redistricting Plans
- 4.5 Committee Proposal
- 4.6 Special Session Actions
- 4.7 Governor's Map Advances, Becomes Law
- 4.8 Referendum
- 5 Voter Repeal Effort
- 6 Legislative maps
- 7 Legal issues
- 8 Citizen Activism
- 9 Timeline
- 10 History
- 11 Partisan registration by district
- 12 Constitutional explanation
- 13 See also
- 14 External links
- 15 References
This page is about redistricting in Maryland. In the wake of the 2010 Census, Maryland adopted new boundaries for the state's 8 new Congressional districts on October 20, 2011. The state adopted a new map for the nearly 200 state legislative districts on February 24, 2012.
Maryland employs two distinct processes for legislative and Congressional redistricting. With respect to Congressional redistricting, the Maryland General Assembly bears primary responsibility, proposing and passing the redistricting plan as ordinary legislation. As such, the Governor of Maryland has the power to veto the plan. For legislative redistricting, the Governor is responsible for drafting plans and submitting the new maps to the General Assembly. The Governor appoints an advisory commission to assist in this task. Once the Governor submits a plan, chamber leadership must introduce the plan as a joint resolution. The General Assembly may then adopt the plan or pass another. If a plan is not adopted by the 45th day of the session, the Governor's plan becomes law.
2011 advisory committee membership
- Chair, Jeanne D. Hitchcock, Esq., Secretary of Appointments
- Thomas Mike Miller, Jr., Senate President
- Michael E. Busch, Speaker of the House
- James King, Former House Member
- Richard Stewart, President and CEO, Montgomery Mechanical Services Incorporated
2001 advisory committee membership
2001 membership on the Governor's Redistricting Advisory Committee included:
- Secretary of State, John T. Willis , Chair
- Senate President, Thomas V. Mike Miller
- Speaker of the House of Delegates, Michael Erin Busch
- Montgomery County Commissioner, Isiah Legget
- Worcester County Commissioner, Louise L. Gulyas
The Redistricting Advisory Committee held 13 public hearings between July 23 and December 22 across the state.
2010 Census results
At 9 percent, Maryland's overall growth was just below the national average. Within the state, the white population shrank by 128,000 residents while minority populations, especially Hispanics, grew. The percent of Marylanders that were Hispanic doubled to 8 percent of the total state population. The portion identified as white fell from 62 percent to 55 percent. Minority growth among blacks and Asians occurred largely in the suburbs of Washington, DC.
Some counties also experienced individual growth rates that dwarfed the state and national averages, reaching as high as 28 percent Other, including Baltimore County, shrank.
Counting prison inmates
Governor O'Malley signed a bill requiring prison inmates to be counted at their last known address prior to incarceration in April of 2010 - the first of its kind in the U.S. Backed by 13 Senators and over 80 Delegates, the "No Representation without Population Act" presented itself as a remedy to rural counties, which housed most of Maryland's prisons, having artificially high population counts. However, the federal government stopped the law’s implementation a year later.
Various Maryland agencies signed off on adjustments made to population figures after the February 2011 delivery of Census data. However, when the state asked prison officials to provide detailed information on the previous addresses of current inmates, the Federal Bureau of Prisons refused, citing privacy violations. Maryland immediately appealed directly to the U.S. Justice Department in a bid to get that information.
If Maryland's Department of Planning, which led the appeal, successfully implemented its plan, rural counties would have lost population compared to the official counts. Somerset County's official population figure would drop 10 percent, while Allegany and Washington Counties would each lose around 3 percent. The winners in such a scenario would be the counties that were home to many current inmates, such as Baltimore City.
Initial Speculation: Democrats may weaken Republican seats
As attention turned to the 2011 summer redistricting process, media reports focused on Maryland's two Republican Congressmen, specifically to Andy Harris of the 1st Congressional District. Asked in April 2011 if the Democratically dominated state legislature would target Harris, Maryland U.S. Congressman Steny Hoyer answered in the affirmative, saying, "I think there's an opportunity there. I think the answer to that is yes."
Harris replied by saying, "I'm waiting, like everyone else, to see what the powers that be in Annapolis [will do with the maps]...I spend my time taking care of my district."
Others speculated that the Republican-leaning 6th Congressional District might be a target for redistricting. Democrats may be able to shift Republican areas from the 6th to the 1st, concentrating Republicans in the 1st and weakening them in the 6th. Another potential approach, some speculated, was to move Democratic voters from Montgomery County (the county includes parts of Districts 4 & 8) into District 6. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R) currently represents District 6 and is serving his ninth term in Congress. During a July 2011 public hearing, several Democrats argued for the latter approach.
Fifth Congressional District Most Overpopulated
Given new population data from the 2010 Census, Congressman Steny Hoyer's (D) district was the most overpopulated in the state. This data indicated strong growth in Maryland's DC suburbs. Rep. Elijah Cummings's (D) district was the most underpopulated. Ultimately, Hoyer's District 5 seat needed to shed around 47,000 residents.
GOP Alternative Redistricting Plan
The Maryland GOP released a "good-government" redistricting plan aimed at creating districts which would do "what is best for Maryland residents, not career politicians." Specifically, the plan aimed at creating compact, contiguous districts and a third minority-majority district. In a more partisan move, the plan paired Democratic Congressmen Dutch Ruppersberger and John Sarbanes in the same district. However, only one of the advisory commission's members was a Republican. The full plan can be found here.
Democratic Alternative Redistricting Plans
The Baltimore Sun obtained copies of two maps being considered by Democrats near the end of September 2011. Assistant professor of political science at St. Mary's College of Maryland Todd Eberly was critical of both proposals. "One thing's clear: There is nothing about reflecting population change. There is no attempt to respect existing boundaries or neighborhoods. It's totally about maximizing Democratic votes, nothing else," he said.
The Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Committee released its recommended map on October 3, 2011. Republicans criticized the proposal for separating like-minded communities while joining areas with few commonalities. After the 2010 elections, Democrats held a 6-2 advantage in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the party would have preferred to create a 7-1 seat advantage after the 2012 elections. The proposed map added traditionally Democratic voters to the 6th District, represented by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R), who had served since 1992.
A few Democrats were also critical of the addition of conservative areas to the African-American majority 4th District, then represented by Donna Edwards, a black woman. She stated, “I understand and share the political interests that are at stake, both nationally and in our state. Nonetheless, I cannot support this plan in its current form given that minority representation interests appear to have been sacrificed for these political interests.” Montgomery County Council President Valerie Ervin (D) said the proposal "looked like gerrymandering" and "African American voters were taken for granted once again."
The newly formed Detroit-based Fannie Lou Hamer Political Action Committee threatened to file suit against the state if the plan was enacted, alleging racial gerrymandering. A spokesman for the PAC said they were working with the GOP to create a third African-American majority district.
Meanwhile, members of Maryland's Tea Party movement rallied on October 18 in Annapolis to protest the proposal.
The public had seven days to comment on the proposal prior to its introduction to the legislature.
Special Session Actions
Republican state Delegate Michael Hough announced on October 12 that he would be introducing “The Maryland Fair Representation Congressional Plan” during the special session. The plan included three minority districts, echoing the desires of the Fannie Lou Hamer Political Action Committee.
Hough stated, "The Maryland Fair Representation Congressional Plan does not divide minority populations and geographic areas and will therefore provide accurate and fair representation for all the citizens of Maryland. The plan put forward by the Governor's Council is simply a partisan gerrymandered mess that divides communities and disenfranchises voters across the state."
The special session began on October 17. Delegate Hough and Sen. E. J. Pipkin introduced the map endorsed by the Hamer PAC, which would create the third majority minority district while combining all rural areas in the state. Fellow Republicans Sen. Nancy Jacobs and Del. Anthony O'Donnell introduced a map endorsed by the state GOP. Meanwhile, Maryland Congresswoman Donna Edwards created a proposed map to create a third majority minority district, which earned the support of Del. Ana Sol Gutierrez prior to the session.
Governor's Map Advances, Becomes Law
All 12 Republicans voted against the map, along with lone Democrat C. Anthony Muse. "I believe it pits the party against the people -- against a minority population that has down through the decades been the party's most loyal supporters, and yet we stand at this moment in history determined to reward that loyalty by diluting their political power, weakening their voices and shrinking their districts,” he said.
The House took up the map on October 19, passing it 91-46. All 41 Republicans, along with 5 Democrats, voted against it. All five dissenting Democrats were from the Washington, D.C. area. Due to technical changes, the Senate had to reconvene the following day to take a final vote to correct typographical errors in the bill. Following the vote, Gov. O'Malley signed the new districts into law. Less than 24 hours later, the Fannie Lou Hamer Political Action Committee, along with Republicans, called on the Justice Department to investigate the maps for possible racial gerrymandering.
On March 5, U.S. District Court Judge William Quarles rejected a challenge to the plan, saying plaintiffs failed to show it violated the state constitution and statutes. It was the final legal challenge to the map.
In mid-July 2012, the Maryland State Board of Elections announced that opponents of the map had collected a sufficient number of signatures in order to place the issue on the November 6 ballot. Opponents of the map needed 55,736 signatures in order to qualify their petition. Supporters of the petition drive argued that the map was gerrymandered in order to favor Democrats. The Referendum, if approved, would have overturned the congressional redistricting plan.
Voter Repeal Effort
Republican opponents of the map adopted by the legislature launched an effort to put the redistricted map before the voters. The maps opponents gathered 25,000 signatures for the June 1, 2012 initial deadline. As of May 31, 2012, the opponents planned on gathering 75,000 signatures to ensure the voters would be able to pass judgment on the redistricted map.
Lower Shore Growth
The release of detailed Census data revealed that the lower shore grew significantly. This meant its districts would need to shed population, becoming smaller and more compact.
House Bill 50
At the local level, politicians were quick to see other districting problems. House Bill 50 would extend the Constitutional mandate that each of the 47 Districts has one Senator and three Delegates by additionally requiring each county to have at least one Delegate. Lacking this provision going into 2001, sparsely populated Districts, usually on the Lower Shore of the Chesapeake Bay, met the existing requirement by drawing exceptionally large districts without each county having its own delegate.
Baltimore to Lose Influence
Due to a loss of approximately 30,000 residents, Baltimore was set to lose some of its legislative clout via redistricting. The city had to at least forfeit a portion of one of its six legislative districts. Since the 1970s, the city has dropped from 44 legislative seats to 24.
The Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Committee released a proposed map of new legislative districts on December 16, 2011. The plan increased the number of majority black districts from 10 to 12 and asked the governor to consider creating a Hispanic majority district in Montgomery County. Officials held a public hearing on the map on December 22, 2011.
Republicans initially criticized the plan for being divisive and highly partisan, but went on to question the integrity of the entire plan after it was discovered that Richard Stewart, one of five members of the Redistricting Advisory Committee, pleaded guilty the prior week to failing to pay nearly $4 million in taxes connected with a business he owned. Governor Martin O'Malley (D) said Stewart never informed him of his legal troubles and would have no further role in the redistricting process.
Sent to Assembly
Gov. Martin O'Malley formally presented the new map to the General Assembly on January 11, 2012. Legislators had 45 days to approve the plan or pass an alternative map. If they did not pass an alternative plan, O'Malley's proposal would automatically become law.
The Fannie Lou Hamer Political Action Committee, a black activist group, said it would sue the state if the map was approved by the legislature. The group argued that the plan violated the federal Voting Rights Act by purposely reducing black influence and violated state laws by splitting more boundaries and counties than was necessary.
With O'Malley's map set to become law on February 25, House legislators put forth five alternative plans, but none of them were scheduled for committee hearings. Del. Susan Krebs (R) said, “There should be hearings for all the alternatives, and they all should be considered. We believe our plans should have the courtesy of a hearing.”
A spokesman for Speaker Michael Busch (D) said that without consensus on an alternative plan hearings were unlikely and the chamber's time could be spent better. While both sides criticized the plan, issues such as same-sex marriage and the budget dominated the conversation in Annapolis. No alternative plans were presented in the Senate, but both chambers filed bills that would change the redistricting process in the future.
Plan Becomes Law
Harford County lawsuit
In Harford County the Republican-controlled County Council determined that the Democratic Party was a "fringe" party -- meaning it would be shut out of the redistricting process. In the previous election, Democrats only garnered 12 percent of the total votes, which was below the county-established 15 percent figure in order to be eligible to sit on the redistricting committee. Democrats were outraged, while Republicans argued that to make an exception for Democrats would open the door for third parties (Green Party, Libertarian Party, etc...) to file similar complaints.
On Thursday, March 10, 2011, Democrats filed suit, seeking to stop any recommendations of the redistricting committee from being considered, thus making good on their threat to sue if two or more of their members weren't seated on the advisory commission charged with redistricting. While Harford's Charter explicitly contains the 15% threshold to be considered a major party and to be eligible for sitting on advisory committees, Democrats said the meaning of the charter changed over time. They based part of their legal argument on the fact that, if only the election results for the City Council President were removed and the polling percentage of Democratic candidates were reweighted, they would have pulled in 21.5% of the vote and thus would have exceeded the threshold.
Maryland resident Howard Gorrell filed suit over the new congressional redistricting map in U.S. District court on October 27, 2011, arguing that it unnecessarily diluted the "voting power of agriculture-related electorates" in the 6th Congressional District and was gerrymandered. The suit asked the court to assume jurisdiction and redraw the map.
On January 19, 2012, U.S. District Judge William D. Quarles Jr. dismissed the suit, ruling against all of Gorell's arguments.
On November 10, 2011, nine Maryland citizens filed a joint lawsuit in federal court, charging the state with civil rights violations as a result of the recently approved Congressional districts. Expected to cost over $250,000, the suit was to be largely financed by the nonprofit Legacy Foundation of Iowa, with money from Republican Congressmen Roscoe Bartlett and Andy Harris. The plaintiffs put forth four main arguments alleging civil rights violations: the 5th Congressional District should be a majority-minority voting district, Districts 4 and 7 should have a stronger black vote, Districts 2 and 3 were politically gerrymandered, and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment was violated in Montgomery County.
Throwing the Party's support behind the suit, Maryland Republican Party Chairman Alex Mooney said, “We join the Fannie Lou Hamer PAC, the Legacy Foundation, Marylanders for Fair and Coherent Representation, and citizens from across Maryland to reaffirm our belief that redistricting should not be done solely on partisanship or incumbent preference. We are eager to see the Governor’s map remedied so that the rights of all Marylanders, regardless of race, geography or political affiliation, are not denied.”
The lawsuit won an initial victory on November 21, 2011 when U.S. District Judge Roger Titus ruled the suit could go ahead and should be heard by a three-judge panel. The move was a blow to Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler, who argued the case should be dismissed. On November 29, 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge William Traxler, Jr. announced a three-judge panel consisting of Judge Paul Niemeyer, Judge Alexander Williams and Judge Roger Titus to hear the case.
Arguments were presented before the court on December 20. That same day the Attorney General's office filed pleadings asking the court to issue an opinion by the end of the week. Maryland's primary was April 3, 2012, with the deadline for congressional candidates falling on January 11. Under federal law, overseas ballots had to be sent out by February 17. A delayed ruling could have jeopardized the state’s ability to print up ballots in time.
On December 23, 2011, the panel dismissed the suit, stating that the plaintiffs failed to meet the burden of proof for any of their claims. In regard to the allegation that the map discriminated against African-Americans by failing to create a third majority-black district, the court said the residents of the additional proposed district were not shown to be a single community of interest.
Judge Paul Niemeyer explained, "The crucial weakness in the plaintiffs' evidence is that it concerns residents of their proposed congressional district in general, and not minority residents specifically. In the absence of this kind of specific evidence, we may not accept bare assertions that the area's African-American residents share the same characteristics, needs and interests."
The panel also said plaintiffs failed to show the map was a partisan gerrymander. Representatives of the Fannie Lou Hamer Foundation Political Action Committee said they would take the case to the United States Supreme Court if they could find the resources. On January 20, 2012, the group filed a notice of appeal. Attorney Jason Torchinsky said the appeal focused on the law counting prisoners in their home districts, rather than where they are imprisoned. They did not appeal other arguments in the case, but planned to argue that all states should count population in the same manner for congressional reapportionment.
If they did not succeed in appealing, opponents of the approved plan said they might start a petition drive to put the issues before voters in a fall referendum. In order to achieve that, organizers would have to collect 55,736 valid signatures, including 18,579 by May 31. The opponents followed through on this plan, and claimed to file the necessary amount of signatures for the first threshold.
Commissioner Smith Lawsuit
Frederick County Commissioner Paul Smith filed suit against the state's new congressional plan on November 22, 2011 for failing to design contiguous and compact voting areas. Smith filed the suit in the Maryland Court of Appeals and in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court, hoping for an expedited ruling. Under the approved map Frederick County is divided into two congressional districts - something that has not happened in some 200 years.
The case in the Maryland Court of Appeals was rejected on procedural grounds on January 10, 2012.
A referendum petition to overturn Maryland's congressional redistricting plan passed in October 2011 was on the November 6, 2012 ballot. Maryland Delegate Justin Ready, who spearheaded the move, announced March 27, 2012 that the referendum would move forward with collecting signatures. In order to qualify for the ballot supporters were required to collect a minimum of 55,736 valid signatures before June 1.
Under the new map, the number of Carroll County delegates was reduced from four to three. Ready stated, "The map, which passed in October, takes Carroll County out of its traditional pairing with Western Maryland and splits us into two congressional districts. So, Taneytown is in the same district as Ocean City and Westminster is connected to Silver Spring in a district that is shaped like the country of Thailand."
The Referendum was certified for the ballot in July and on July 26 the Maryland Democratic Party filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the petition drive. Many of the signatures were collected through an online process which automatically fills in most of the information required on petitions. According to the suit, this process violated the law by filling out petitions with voter information. It also argued that at least 5,000 signatures that were certified as valid were in fact invalid. Striking these signatures would bring the total number below the required number to get the issue on the ballot.
On August 24, 2011, a coalition of minority groups led by the NAACP asked Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) to release proposed congressional redistricting plans 30 days prior to the special legislative session slated to commence on October 17. Although O'Malley scheduled 12 public hearings across the state, the NAACP said those settings only allowed the public to provide general comments, not specific ones. More time is needed, they said, was to ensure the lines were not drawn in such a way that would dilute the minority vote. The groups also asked the governor to release legislative redistricting plans 60 days prior to the beginning of the regular session in January.
In a letter to O'Malley, Maryland NAACP President Gerald Stansbury stated, “Releasing these plans early ensures that citizens have an opportunity to review the redistricting plan that will be debated in the General Assembly, and gives citizens a chance to express their concerns to the governor, the Redistricting Advisory Committee and their representatives in the state legislature.”
In order to provide candidates with time to campaign for the 2012 elections, Maryland's General Assembly met on October 17, 2011 for a brief special session. That session was dedicated to Congressional Districts, as legislative seats are not up for election again until 2014. The legislature dealt with the State Legislative districts in an early 2012 session. Democratic Governor Martin O'Malley named a special advisory committee for redistricting on July 4, 2011.
The following timeline was provided by the Maryland Department of Planning.
|Maryland 2010 Redistricting Timeline|
|March 2011||Census 2010 Redistricting population counts received from Census Bureau|
|Spring/Summer 2011||Regional public hearings conducted throughout the state for Congressional and State Legislative Redistricting.|
|July 2011||Governor's Redistricting Advisory Committee appointed.|
|October 17, 2011||Special legislative session called to adopt Congressional redistricting plan.|
|January 11, 2012||Governor submits State Legislative Redistricting Plan to President of Senate and Speaker of House of Delegates to be introduced as joint Resolution to Maryland General Assembly on first day of Maryland's 2012 legislative session.|
April 3, 2012
|State primary election to include revised Congressional districts.|
|By February 25, 2012||Alternative state legislative district plan must be adopted by this date or the Governor's plan is adopted.|
|Fall 2014||State primary and general election to include revised State legislative districts.|
In 2011, lawmakers moved the 2012 primaries from February to April, giving themselves more leeway on Congressional redistricting.
Deviation from "Ideal Districts"
|2000 Population Deviation|
|State House Districts||9.89%|
|State Senate Districts||9.91%|
|Under federal law, districts may vary from an 'Ideal District' by up to 10 percent, though the lowest number achievable is preferred. 'Ideal Districts' are computed through simple division of the number of seats for any office into the population at the time of the Census.|
Partisan registration by district
|Partisan Registration and Representation by Congressional District, 2010|
|Congressional District||Democrats||Republicans||Unaffiliated||District Total||Party Advantage*||111th Congress||112th Congress|
|1 (Eastern Shore)||196,183||196,411||78,590||471,184||0.001% Republican|
|2 (Baltimore area)||241,628||92,085||60,137||393,850||162.39% Democratic|
|3 (Baltimore area)||240,852||114,282||78,945||434,079||110.75% Democratic|
|4 (Washington, DC suburbs)||314,380||50,596||63,481||428,457||521.35% Democratic|
|5 (Prince George, Anne Arundel)||277,134||118,109||78,797||474,040||134.64% Democratic|
|6 (Northwest Maryland)||159,715||208,024||77,940||445,679||94.98% Republican|
|7 (Baltimore and Howard Counties)||283,827||64,222||55,940||403,989||341.95% Democratic|
|8 (Montgomery County)||243,560||81,885||91,562||417,007||197.44% Democratic|
|State Totals||1,957,279||925,614||585,392||3,468,285||111.46% Democratic||7 D, 1 R||6 D, 2 R|
|*The partisan registration advantage was computed as the gap between the two major parties in registered voters.|
- State Legislative and Congressional Redistricting after the 2010 Census
- State-by-state redistricting procedures
- Maryland Department of Planning, "Redistricting: Congressional and Legislative Districts," accessed June 5, 2012
- Maryland Department of Planning, "Redistricting FAQs," accessed June 16, 2011
- Office of Governor Martin O'Malley, "Governor Martin O'Malley Announces Members of the Governor's Redistricting Advisory Committee," June 30, 2011
- Department of Planning, "Redistricting: Past Public Hearings," accessed June 5, 2012
- Delmarva Now, "Census results are enlightening," February 14, 2011
- Fox News, "Feds Foil Maryland Redistricting Plan to Count Inmates by Former Home," March 23, 2011
- Hometown Annapolis, "Maryland finishes prison count for census," March 23, 2011 (dead link)
- Severn patch, "Federal Roadblock Prevents New Inmate Identification Method," March 27, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "In redistricting, Democrats look for electoral opportunities," April 16, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "In redistricting, Democrats look for electoral opportunities," April 16, 2011
- Washington Post, "A model redistricting plan from the Maryland GOP," July 15, 2011
- WAMU 88.5, "Md. Redistricting: Democrats Target Bartlett's Seat," July 25, 2011
- Washington Examiner, "Md. Democrats target Republican congressional district," July 31, 2011
- The Washington Post, "Hoyer’s district must shrink in redistricting," July 6, 2011
- City Biz List, "Redistricting Hearings Start Soon; Republicans Have Already Drawn Their Lines," July 14, 2011 (dead link)
- Baltimore Sun, "Two maps emerge in redistricting discussions," September 30, 2011
- The Baltimore Sun, "Redistricting panel targets Rep. Bartlett," October 3, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "GOP, others find faults with proposed map," October 4, 2011
- Washington Post, "Md. Rep. Donna Edwards says redistricting plan doesn’t adequately represent minorities," October 11, 2011
- Washington Examiner, "MontCo lawmakers bristle over Md. redistricting plan," October 5, 2011
- The Star Democrat, "Pipkin will introduce 'Fair Representation' congressional redistricting plan at session," October 13, 2011
- CityBizList Baltimore, "Black Group Charges Racial Gerrymandering in New Congressional Districts and May File Suit," October 7, 2011
- Capital News Service, "Tea Party, Others Rally Against Governor’s Redistricting Plan," October 18, 2011
- Washington Post, "Md. Republican delegate to include minority group’s plan in redistricting measure," October 12, 2011
- Washington Post, "Marathon debate begins on Md. redistricting," October 17, 2011
- Washington Post, "Md. Rep. Edwards submits alternative redistricting map as lawmakers gather for special session," October 17, 2011
- Washington Post, "Maryland redistricting plan advances," October 17, 2011
- Gazette.Net, "Senate OKs governor’s redistricting plan," October 18, 2011
- NBC Washington, "Md. Senate Approves US House Redistricting Bill," October 18, 2011
- Washington Post, "House of Delegates roll call vote on Maryland redistricting," October 19, 2011
- Washington Post, "O’Malley signs congressional redistricting bill for Maryland," October 20, 2011
- Washington Post, "Political battle over Md. redistricting over, but legal fight concerning minorities ready to take over," October 20, 2011
- Washington Post, "Final challenge to Md. congressional redistricting map dismissed by federal judge," March 6, 2012
- Herald-Mail, "Petitions certified; Md. redistricting map, gay marriage law to be on November ballot," July 11, 2012
- The Baltimore Sun, "Redistricting Map Foes Say They Have Passed First Test," May 31, 2012
- Ocean City Today, "Lower Shore election districts to shrink," May 13, 2011
- Delmarva Times, "Redistricting is an opportunity," January 24, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "Redistricting: Mighty Baltimore to lose influence," August 11, 2011
- Gazette.Net, "Redistricting advisory committee releases map," December 17, 2011
- Citybizlist Baltimore, "Analysis: Legislative Redistricting Has Republicans Frowning," December 19, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "Redistricting plan questioned after O'Malley adviser's conviction," December 22, 2011
- Washington Post, "O’Malley submits state legislative redistricting map to General Assembly," January 11, 2012
- Washington Times, "Activists plan suit on map for Maryland legislature," January 12, 2012
- Gazette.Net, "Alternative redistricting plans stalled," February 17, 2012
- WBAL, "Lawmakers To Let O'Malley Redistricting Plan Take Effect Without a Vote," accessed February 23, 2012
- Baltimore Sun, "Harford Democrats termed fringe party, shut out of redistricting," February 17, 2011
- Baltimore Sun, "Democrats, GOP both threaten suit over Harford redistricting," February 16, 2011
- Explore Harford, "Harford Democrats sue over county council redistricting panel appointments," March 10, 2011
- The Republic, "Western Maryland resident files lawsuit over redistricting map," October 27, 2011
- Gazette.net, "Washington County man files lawsuit to get districts redrawn," October 27, 2011
- Herald-Mail, "Local man's redistricting lawsuit dismissed," January 21, 2012
- Citybizlist Baltimore, "Nine Citizens To File Civil Rights Lawsuit Challenging Congressional Redistricting," November 10, 2011
- Washington Post, "Groups file suit against Maryland redistricting map, alleging voting rights violations," November 10, 2011
- Washington Post, "Judge rules Md. redistricting challenge should go forward," November 21, 2011
- Washington Post, "Judge appoints 3-judge panel to hear Maryland redistricting lawsuit," November 29, 2011
- The Republic, "Judges: New Md. congressional maps don't discriminate; 2 majority-black districts is OK," December 23, 2011
- Washington Post, "Judges: New Md. congressional maps don’t discriminate; 2 majority-black districts is OK," December 23, 2011
- The Capital, "Group hopes to take state redistricting case to Supreme Court," December 27, 2011
- Washington Post, "Plaintiffs file appeal to US Supreme Court on Maryland redistricting," January 20, 2012
- Herald Mail, "Petition drive possible over congressional redistricting," January 8, 2012
- The Baltimore Sun, “Redistricting Map Foes Say They Have Passed First Test,” May 31, 2012
- Frederick News Post, "Commissioner Smith's lawsuit challenges redistricting," November 23, 2011
- Frederick News Post, "High court dismisses redistricting lawsuit; Circuit Court case still pending," January 21, 2012
- Eldersburg Patch, "Del. Ready Supports Petition to Fight Congressional Redistricting," March 28, 2012
- Southern Maryland Online, "Democratic Lawsuit Challenges GOP Petition Success," July 27, 2012
- Baltimore Sun, "Minority groups want redistricting maps released soon," August 24, 2011
- Washington Post, "NAACP and other groups ask Md. Gov. O’Malley to release redistricting plans early," August 24, 2011
- Carroll County Times, "Delegates plan special session to decide new boundaries for Congressional representatives," July 10, 2011 (dead link)
- The Baltimore Sun, "What about redistricting?," January 10, 2011
- Explore Baltimore County, "Districts' borders on General Assembly agenda," January 12, 2011
- Office of Governor Martin O’Malley, “Governor Martin O'Malley Announces Members of the Governor's Redistricting Advisory Committee,” accessed June 7, 2012
- Maryland Department of Planning Redistricting timeline
- Carroll County Times, "Delegates plan special session to decide new boundaries for Congressional representatives," July 10, 2011 (dead link)
- Maryland State Board of Elections, 2012 Presidential Election, Election Dates," accessed June16, 2011
- Hometown Annapolis, "State lawmakers to return for special session this fall," April 13, 2011 (dead link)
- National Conference of State Legislatures, “Redistricting 2000 Population Deviation Table”," accessed February 1, 2011
- Maryland State Board of Elections, “Eligible Active Voters on Precinct Register: Election: 2010 GUBERNATORIAL GENERAL ELECTION”, October 18, 2010
- Maryland General Assembly, "Information on Redistricting in Maryland"