No, the shape of the district is circumstantial evidence. The people who draw those lines swear up and down (and often under oath, as these things are routinely contested in court) that they would never do this. And because the distinction is intent and not the result, it basically amounts to an unprovable thought crime.
But what we have here is a guy with a bunch of analysis based directly on racial data, and a bunch of emails detailing specific plans and concerns about racial demographics. In this one case we know the relevant boundaries constitute a civil rights crime.
Lol the angle in that story is that Democrats should "give up" gerrymandering to convince Republicans to do so. I don't think this counts as "pro-Republican" (or "anti-Democrat")
bias.
The point is that it draws attention to Maryland, which is gerrymandered by the Dems - contrary to your claims that they'd ignore that. Why is it supposed to be "pro-Republican"?
(Nor is it the only story NPR has on gerrymandering in Maryland, by the way - merely the most recent one.)
But what we have here is a guy with a bunch of analysis based directly on racial data, and a bunch of emails detailing specific plans and concerns about racial demographics. In this one case we know the relevant boundaries constitute a civil rights crime.