Last year saw the United States Supreme Court rule that South Carolina's Republican-drawn congressional map was not an example of racial gerrymandering.

What's more, Republicans had another reason to cheer this week when the South Carolina Supreme Court also upheld the map. 

State Supreme Court finds no bar to partisan gerrymandering

According to the South Carolina Daily Gazette, the League of Women Voters challenged the map on the basis that it represented unlawful partisan gerrymandering, a claim which the justices rejected.

In its ruling, South Carolina's highest judicial body acknowledged that the state constitution explicitly recognizes a right to vote.

Yet it stressed that there "are no constitutional provisions or statutes that pertain to, prohibit, or limit partisan gerrymandering in the congressional redistricting process in South Carolina."

The state Supreme Court therefore concluded that the issue of "partisan gerrymandering" is a political question which exists outside of the judicial branch's purview.

South Carolina Senate president "grateful to see this matter finally resolved"

The Gazette noted how Wednesday's decision was met with praise in a statement released by South Carolina Senate President Thomas Alexander.

"After years of litigation — only for the federal and state supreme courts to tell us what we knew all along — I am grateful to see this matter finally resolved," Alexander was quoted as saying.

Meanwhile, the League of Women Voters voiced opposition to the state Supreme Court's ruling via a statement released by Lynn Teague, who serves as the group's vice president.

"Partisan gerrymandering is an attack on our most fundamental right as citizens, the right to vote," Teague declared before adding that the League of Women voters "will not stop fighting for fair redistricting."

ACLU lawyer: Ruling will create "greater entrenchment of political extremism"

Another critic is Allen Chaney, who serves as legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of South Carolina.

"By washing its hands of redistricting, the Court marks itself satisfied with the idea that politicians can game the system to retain their own power and ushers in an even greater entrenchment of political extremism," the Gazette quoted Chaney as saying.

"We are seeing — and will continue to see — state legislatures race to further minimize and perhaps erase the representation of the state’s minority political party in Congress," he predicted.

"These results may, indeed, be in line with each respective state’s constitution and laws, but they collectively have the effect of diminishing our constitutional republic as a whole," Chaney added.