Justices uphold Arizona's system for redistricting

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday upheld Arizona congressional districts drawn by an independent commission and rejected a constitutional challenge from Republican lawmakers.

The 5-4 outcome preserves efforts in 13 states to limit partisan influence in redistricting. Most notably, California uses an independent commission to draw electoral boundaries for its largest-in-the-nation congressional delegation.

The Arizona case stemmed from voter approval of an independent commission in 2000. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive. Democrats won them all in 2012, but the Republicans recaptured one last year.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court that there is "no constitutional barrier to a state's empowerment of its people by embracing that form of lawmaking."

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Ginsburg in her opinion.

In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts accused the majority of approving a "deliberate constitutional evasion." He was joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

States are required to re-draw maps for congressional and state legislative districts to account for population changes after the once-a-decade census.

The justices have been unwilling to limit excessive partisanship in redistricting, known as gerrymandering. A gerrymander is a district that is intentionally drawn, and sometimes oddly shaped, to favor one political party.

The case is Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission et al., 13-1314.

Read Tuesday’s Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for full details.

Upcoming Events