Home Uncategorized Oral Arguments Held in Arizona Lawsuit Over Whether U.S. Constitution Bars Independent Redistricting Commissions for Congress
formats

Oral Arguments Held in Arizona Lawsuit Over Whether U.S. Constitution Bars Independent Redistricting Commissions for Congress

On January 24, a 3-judge U.S. District Court heard arguments in Arizona State Legislature v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 2:12cv-1211. Arizona U.S. House district boundaries are drawn by an independent commission. The legislature filed the lawsuit to regain its old ability to draw the district lines. The legislature argues that Article One, section 4 of the U.S. Constitution says that only state legislature can write election laws concerning congressional elections. See this article about the hearing.

2 Responses

  1. Jim Riley

    A legislature could by law establish a body that does congressional redistricting, the issue is whether the Constitution means the “legislative authority” of a State, including the initiative; or whether it means the legislature proper.

    In the past, the Supreme Court has ruled that a gubernatorial veto and a popular veto (referendum) are parts of the process by which legislation is enacted.

    The initiative in Arizona explicitly said it was removing redistricting authority from the legislature. The defendant (which is the redistricting commission) is making silly arguments that drawing district maps is not a manner regulation; or that because the legislature may comment on a proposed map, they are not removed from the process.

  2. Demo Rep

    Minority rule gerrymander result — whatever gang is making the gerrymander map.

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Protected with SiteGuarding.com Antivirus