ASHEVILLE - Political lines that split the city and other parts of North Carolina can stay, the Supreme Court has said, ruling it cannot intervene in the fight over electoral maps drawn for partisan advantage.

The long-awaited 5-4 ruling of the divided court came June 27. The decision leaves in place electoral maps some voters from Asheville say deprive them of constitutional rights.

One Asheville area plaintiff who had asked the highest court for relief called the decision "the ultimate punt" and said the lines may yet be changed through North Carolina's Supreme Court.

A powerful Western North Carolina state legislator, though, said the decision put line-drawing solidly in the hands of lawmakers, meaning other challenges should be dropped.

Purple, but red

At the heart of the case Rucho v. Common Cause are congressional districts drawn by Republicans who hold a majority in the General Assembly. The districts give the GOP a 10-3 advantage in House seats despite North Carolina being "purple" and nearly evenly divided in support for statewide Democratic and Republican candidates.

Lead plaintiffs in the activist group Common Cause said mapmakers, including former state Sen. Bob Rucho, violated voters' First Amendment right to freedom of speech and the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law.

Also part of the case were partisan maps drawn by Maryland Democrats.

Asheville, with other mountain communities, was for decades part of the far western 11th District. But after the 2010 GOP takeover of the General Assembly, map drawers split off a large chunk of the city into the 10th District, which snakes from the mountains to the suburbs of Charlotte. The change weakened progressive votes, handing the 11th to arch-conservative Mark Meadows and the 10th to Republican Patrick McHenry.

Meadows celebrated the decision saying it was a victory for local control.

"Today’s Supreme Court decision isn’t a victory for Republicans or Democrats – it is a victory for Americans who believe states, localities and main street voters should have control over their political systems, not unelected judges and bureaucrats,"

A spokesman for McHenry said he was not sure if the congressman would have a statement.

'Ultimate punt'

Jake Quinn, one of the three Asheville area plaintiffs, called the decision "deeply disappointing" and "anti-climatic."

"The five justices in the majority of the U.S. Supreme court have shrugged their shoulders, thrown up their hands and said it is too hard for us to figure out," said Quinn a longtime local political activist and now chair of the Buncombe County Board of Elections.

"It's the ultimate punt."

Quinn said the districts may still not stand, since plaintiffs have also brought a challenge to the state's highest court.

Other local plaintiffs were Aaron Sarver, who now works as a spokesman for Democratic Sheriff Quentin Miller, and attorney Jones Byrd.

Sarver didn't return multiple messages seeking comment. Byrd was undergoing medical treatment in Winston-Salem.

State Sen. Ralph Hise, R-Mitchell, chairs the General Assembly's redistricting and elections committee and said the N.C. Supreme Court has already said map making belongs to the legislature and can entail partisan advantage and incumbent protection.

"Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has reached the same conclusion, all legal cases on this matter should end so we can move on," Hise said in an emailed statement.

Invisible line

In North Asheville, Virginia Wilson has lived at her Hyannis Drive home since 1969. But the political jockeying more than 200 miles away in Raleigh caused a strange and important gap to appear between her and her neighbors.

She sits toward the end of Hyannis, next to relatively new complex for senior residents. Most of the street is considered city limits, she said. And the whole street, like all of Asheville, was in the 11th District for decades.

Wilson said she’s followed the gerrymandering case, though she didn’t initially realize an invisible line had been drawn across her street that kept her in the 11th but put her neighbors in the 10th.That means people living next to each other would have to turn to different members of congress for assistance.

“Those two there,” Wilson said, referring to Meadows and McHenry, “they’re worthless.”

The main advocate for the court's June 27 decision was Chief Justice John Roberts who wrote the majority opinion.

"We have no commission to allocate political power and influence in the absence of a constitutional directive or legal standards to guide us in the exercise of such authority," Roberts said, acknowledging the North Carolina and Maryland maps are "highly partisan."

It was a dramatic withdrawal by the nation's highest court from the political battles that have consumed states for decades, and it was loudly denounced by the court's liberal justices. Writing the dissent for the four liberals was Associate Justice Elena Kagan.

"Of all the times to abandon the court's duty to declare the law, this was not the one," Kagan said. "The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government."

The battle in state legislatures

The ruling addresses the way election districts are redrawn once every decade in most states directly following the once-a-decade census. It's a system dominated by political self-interest that has grown more intense every time the Supreme Court declined to tame it.

The high court has never before declared unconstitutional an election map drawn for blatant partisan advantage — though it has consistently ruled against racial gerrymandering. Justices have reasoned that elected officials are expected to joust for power through the line drawing, while courts should be reluctant to intercede.

Challengers were betting that this year, with these maps, the court might see things differently. In North Carolina, Republicans drew lines to give themselves 77% of the congressional seats, though the state is closer to an even split. In 2008 the state went for President Barack Obama but switched in 2012, favoring GOP candidate Mitt Romney. It has a Democratic Governor, Roy Cooper, but two Republican senators, Richard Burr and Thom Tillis.

Several of the lines were used to divide the traditionally liberal voting blocs found in urban areas. Charlotte and Asheville were among those with populations sliced in a way to water down Democratic votes. The 11th had long been a swing district with Democrats and Republicans trading spots. "Blue Dog" Democrat Heath Shuler, who held conservative positions on gun rights and abortion was the last of his party to hold the seat, deciding not to run in 2012 after the new maps were drawn.

In more liberal Maryland, Democrats gave their party a disproportionate, 7-1 majority.

The court had declined to intervene in similar cases five times before, most recently last year, when the justices refused to decide partisan gerrymandering challenges in Wisconsin and Maryland.

The Supreme Court's action followed federal court rulings this year in Ohio and Michigan striking down partisan gerrymanders and ordering new maps to be drawn. The justices temporarily blocked those requirements in May, pending their decisions in North Carolina and Maryland.

The justices last year let stand the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision striking down that state's congressional map and replacing it with one that helped Democrats win more seats in November. That was because the case was decided under the state constitution, rather than in federal court.

For the past decade, Democrats have been the bigger losers in gerrymandering fights. Republicans seized power in many states in the 2010 midterm elections, giving them control over the redistricting process. Democrats are at a disadvantage entering the 2020 elections, which will determine who draws the next decade's state and congressional lines in most states.

Reform efforts, local districts

Eight states, including California, use commissions to draw maps that are designed to treat both parties fairly. Voters in Colorado, Michigan and Utah chose that route last fall, while Missouri and Ohio voters approved other changes.

A bi-partisan group of state legislators led by Rep. Chuck McGrady, R-Henderson, as well as Asheville City Council members have called for a similar change in North Carolina. But while the effort drew historic support it failed again to get past the reservations of the General Assembly's leaders.

State GOP legislators have used districting locally to break up Democratic holds on the Buncombe County Board of Commissioners and Asheville's council.

During oral argument in March, conservative justices noted that voters' initiatives might render the court's interference unnecessary. But liberal justices argued that extreme partisan gerrymanders unconstitutionally dilute the weight of some citizens' votes and should be addressed.

This is a developing story and will be updated. Check back for more.