amounted to an unconstitutional gerrymander.

After Wolf and lawmakers in the GOP-controlled General Assembly did not produce a replacement, the court enacted its own map last month and gave candidates extra time for petition gathering.

Monday's decision comes in a federal case brought a month ago by eight sitting Republican congressmen and two GOP state senators. They argued the state justices infringed on the Legislature's prerogative and did not give lawmakers enough time to come up with a replacement.

The panel said the senators have only two votes in their chamber, calling that "inadequate as a matter of law to allow a lawsuit premised on an institutional injury to the General Assembly." The eight Republican congressmen, the judges wrote, may have wasted resources campaigning in their old districts, but they cannotprove that was caused by a violation of the U.S. Constitution's Elections Clause.

"The cost of shifting district boundaries — in terms of both campaign funding and constituent fealty — is surely appreciable," the judges wrote. "But the federal congressional plaintiffs have identified no legal principle tethering that cost to a legally cognizable interest in the composition of their electoral districts under the Elections Clause."

A group of 18 Democratic voters sued in state court last year to challenge the 2011 map, a case the state Supreme Court put on a fast track before throwing out the former district lines.

All five Democrats on the state Supreme Court said the map violated the state constitution, but one of the Democrats joined both Republicans in objecting to the majority's determination to enact