On December 2, the Arizona state legislature filed this 60-page opening brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona State Legislature v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 13-1314. Article One of the U.S. Constitution says that “the legislature” shall write laws concerning congressional elections, unless congress chooses to write them instead. The issue in this case is whether the language of Article One means that independent redistricting commissions are not permitted to draw U.S. House district boundaries.
The Arizona independent redistricting commission includes of two members appointed by the majority party in the legislature, and two appointed by the second largest party in the legislature (then those four commissioners choose a fifth commissioner). Page 50 says that nowadays, a state legislature “might include a few Greens and Libertarians” and criticizes the Arizona law for not ever making it possible for a third party that might have legislators to have a role in choosing members of the Commission.
The brief of the Redistricting Commission is due January 16, 2015. If the U.S. Supreme Court sides with the legislature, that precedent would probably affect ballot access law in certain states. For instance, Pennsylvania’s petition deadline for independent and minor party candidates was set in 1984 by the State Elections Department, not the legislature, and the Arizona case outcome might upset that Pennsylvania arrangement. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
Interesting that they raise that point about Greens and Libertarians, if accepted that could have broader impact on a lot of commissions and agencies that by law consist of members of the two-largest parties. I’m a huge proponent of nonpartisan redistricting, but the textual argument they raise about “legislature” is an interesting one, though I think ultimately defeated by the point that the people as a whole can act in a “legislative” capacity at the state level through referendums and the constitutional amendment process.
It is, however, fairly easily resolved by adopting rules whereby the legislature rubber-stamps the commission’s results in an up-or-down, no-amendments vote. That’s the “Iowa plan” than is being pushed in some states. And it does provide some check if the commission does something truly stupid or unpopular.
Could Congress draw congressional district boundaries? Certainly.
Could Congress dictate the use of a redistricting commission to draw congressional districts. Certainly. Congress dictates that districts be used, and when they must be changed. There is no reason that they could not dictate the process by which they are drawn.
Could a state legislature dictate the use of a redistricting commission? Of course. There is no reason that a legislature has less authority than Congress.
If the state legislature can pass a law dictating the use of a redistricting commission, why can’t the initiative process be used as well?
Is it material whether it is a “law” or in the constitution of the state?
I think that the Arizona legislature and the district court are looking at two different things. The legislature is looking at the 2011 line-drawing exercise, and seeing that maps are conventionally created as ordinary legislation, but missing what as at issue is the process of drawing lines.
A fine brief, as would be expected from Mr. Clement. I believe it may attempt a bridge too far with its claim that Congress cannot authorize re-districting by commission. I think Congress could district itself, and thus could delegate the power to another entity, like a state commission. It has not done so, however, leaving the issue immaterial at this point.
One more EVIL rotted distraction from the AUTOMATIC minority rule resulting from single member districts — Who or what ever is making the pack/crack gerrymander districts.
1/2 votes x 1/2 gerrymander areas = 1/4 CONTROL.
Low tech math that the MORON lawyers and judges can not detect in their MORON brains — since 1776 (and earlier — back to the 1200s with the creation of the English House of Commons).
The USA House of Reps gerrymander system goes with the Senate and Electoral College gerrymander systems
– IT SHOWS. Undeclared WARS, domestic oppressions, dying urban areas, INSANE deficits, INSANE national debt, etc.
—-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V. — regardless of ALL MORONS on Mother Earth — esp. the MORONS writing MORON briefs.
Could a state enact a congressional district plan through the initiative process?