There are imaginary lines that define the ways we live—the people we can vote for, the laws we live under, and what groups we can be a part of. What happens when these lines that constrict us divide the communities they are meant to uplift?
Every 10 years the census occurs, telling us who is where. It is upon the census data being released that politicians in each state are able to decide where to draw these divisive lines to create the districts they will be running in. They do not have free reign, however. Rules guide the ways they draw lines:
- Districts must be contiguous; all parts of one district must be touching
- Districts must be compact; they must make a shape that makes sense
- Districts must have equal population to one another
Some states add in their own criteria which can include one key component:
- Districts must keep in mind communities of interest
"Communities of interest" as an idea, to all of us residing in these districts, is a reasonable request. We begin to think of our church communities, the networks created among other refugees, your local PTA. However, communities of interest are not defined by those who created the rules, leaving the individuals drawing lines unsure of what should be called a "community". The supreme court has brought it up in court cases, but each time has lacked defining the term itself. Because it is so loose, it is up to interpretation. This can be dangerous, since this concept becomes subjective to an individual's perception.
How do we begin to define communities of interest? It is not up to us, as researchers or residents of a district, but we can instead question the extent of what communities can be, and attempt to shape the boundaries around those we are actually trying to protect.