Interactive: Compare proposed fixes for Pa.’s gerrymandered congressional map Pennsylvania’s most recent map of congressional districts was declared an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander by the state Supreme Court, sparking a nasty political and legal fight and setting off a scramble to draw a new map for the 2018 midterm elections. Click here to compare competing proposals from groups involved in the case.

The Supreme Court ordered the map proposals be submitted with information on the number of counties and municipalities that are split into multiple congressional districts. (One criticism of the most recent map was that it divided 28 counties and 68 municipalities.)

The Republican lawmakers’ proposal splits 15 counties and 17 towns. House Democrats’ map divides 17 counties and 18 municipalities, while Senate Democrats’ map divides 15 counties and 17 municipalities.

At a news conference Thursday in Harrisburg, Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman (R., Centre) said Wolf declined his request to petition the court for an extension and give the legislature time to hold public hearings and draw a new map.

“We’re heading towards chaos,” Corman said, accusing the Supreme Court of usurping the power of the executive and legislative branches.

Without a map from the legislature approved by Wolf, the Supreme Court has said, it will adopt its own map by Monday. The court has hired Stanford University professor Nathaniel Persily, a redistricting expert who has helped draw congressional maps in multiple states.

Republicans said they will challenge any map the court adopts — possibly by seeking an injunction in federal court and arguing that the justices have overstepped their bounds.

“We don’t know what’s going to happen,” said Drew Crompton, the top attorney for Senate Republicans. “We’re working on every sort of gyration.”

Others submitting proposals to the court Thursday included Stack and the Republican “intervenors,” a group of GOP voters and local officials.

Lawrence J. Tabas, the attorney representing the Republican local officials, said they submitted a map in addition to the lawmakers’ because “our positions are not always identical” and the intervenors had not been involved in map-making in 2011 or this time.

“They submitted one good-looking map,” Tabas said of the Republican lawmakers’ proposal, “We submitted one, too. They’re different.”

Staff writers Andrew Seidman and Jonathan Tamari contributed to this article.