Is voter-created redistricting commission constitutional? SCOTUS will consider the issue
Photo from Shutterstock.
Arizona voters’ quest to take partisanship out of redistricting will be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The court accepted the appeal on Thursday in a case that contends a voter-created commission tasked with redrawing congressional boundaries violates the elections clause, report the Washington Post, the New York Times, SCOTUSblog, the Arizona Republic and the Los Angeles Times. The commission has been instructed to keep congressional districts compact without taking into account the incumbents’ wishes.
The commission is made up of two members appointed by Democrats, two members appointed by Republicans, and a fifth member chosen by the four other members. Voters approved a constitutional amendment creating the commission in a 2000 ballot measure known as Proposition 106.
The state’s legislature contends that it has the exclusive power to do the line drawing under a constitutional provision that reads: “The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof.”
A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court said voters had the authority to create the commission because they were acting as the legislature when they amended the state constitution.
A second issue in the case is whether the commission violates a federal law that says redistricting will be conducted “in the manner provided” by state law, according to the SCOTUSblog account. There is also a chance the Supreme Court won’t reach the merits, SCOTUSblog says, because of a third issue: whether the Arizona Legislature has standing to sue.
The case, Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, comes to the Supreme Court as a formal appeal that the court has little discretion to reject, SCOTUSblog says. The blog links to the case documents here.
