The Independent View: Supreme Court Will Hear Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission

On Tuesday, 11/08/2015, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for another One-Person, One Vote Principle, Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.

It is a challenge to an independent Commission’s redistricting maps for the State Legislature in Arizona.

The case is whether the desire to gain partisan advantage for one political party justifies intentionally creating over-populated legislative districts that results in tens of thousands of individual voters being denied Equal Protection because their individual votes are devalued, violating the one-person, one-vote principle; and whether the desire to obtain favorable preclearance review by the Justice Department permits the creation of legislative districts that deviate from the one-person, one-vote principle, and, even if creating unequal districts to obtain preclearance approval was once justified, whether this is still a legitimate justification after Shelby County v. Holder.

The impact of this case of course hinges on how the Court rules.

A ruling for the commission would leave the current maps in effect and reinforce that states have some leeway in redistricting as long as they don’t deviate too far from equally populated districts. On the other hand, a ruling for Harris could have much broader ripple effects. In a “friend of the Court” brief filed in support of the Commission, a group of former Justice Department officials note that, as of 2010, “all or parts” of sixteen states were required to obtain preclearance for their redistricting maps.

If the Court were to rule that a desire to obtain preclearance did not justify deviations from equally populated districts, the officials warn, “over a thousand redistricting plans would be open to legal challenges, creating massive instability in the political process in States throughout the nation.”