Communication 09 How To draw Redistricting Plans That Will Stand Up In Court

Home

2.Unless Necessary to Achieve Some Rational State Policy The Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Sims had anticipated that some deviations from population equality in legislative plans might be justified if they were b incident to the effectuation of a rational state policy . . . .579(1964). So far, the only rational state policy that has served to justify an overa legislative plan has been respecting the boundaries of political in only three Supreme Court cases: Mahan v. Howell,410 U.S. 315 (1973); Brown v. Thomson,462 U.S. 835 (1983); and Voinovich v. Quilter,507 U.S. 146 (1993). In Mahan v. Howell, the Supreme Court upheld a legislative redistricting plan enac Virginia General Assemblythat had an overall range among House d Court took note of the General Assemblys constitutional authori particular political subdivisions, and found that this legislati substantial aspect of the Assemblys powers and practices, and t political subdivision boundaries in drawing House districts. Brown v. Thomson,462 U.S. 835 (1983), upholding a legislative plan with an overall range of 89 percent, was decided by the Supreme Court on the same day Karcher v. Daggett, 462 U.S. 725 (1983), where it threw out a congressional plan with an overall percent. Reconciling these two cases is not easy. Nevertheless First, as I have noted, the constitutional standard for legislat standard for congressional plans. Second, it is important to understand that in Brown v. Thomson the Court was faced with a reapportionment plan rather than with a redistricting plan. The members of the Wyoming House of Representatives were being reapportioned among Wyomings counties, rather than having new districts created for them. Because the boundaries of the distri opportunities for partisan mischief were far reduced. Third, Wyoming put forward a rational state policy to justify ten percent, and the Court endorsed it. Writing for the Court, Wyomings constitutional policyfollowed since statehoodof usin districts and insuring that each county had at least one represe and legitimate state concerns, and had been applied in a manner or discrimination. He also found that the population deviations preserve counties as representative districts, and that there wa to favor particular interests or geographical areas. 462 U.S. a843-46. But Wyomings policy of affording representation to political su less important to the result than was the peculiar posture in wh Court. The appellants chose not to challenge the 89 percent ove challenge only the effect of giving the smallest county a repres by Justice Stevens, concurred in the result but emphasized that 15