Democracy DeLayed: The High Court Distorts Voting Rights Principles to Thwart Partially the Texas Republican Gerrymander
![handle is hein.journals/tlj42 and id is 613 raw text is: DEMOCRACY DELAYED: THE HIGH COURT
DISTORTS VOTING RIGHTS PRINCIPLES TO
THWART PARTIALLY THE TEXAS REPUBLICAN
GERRYMANDER
Gary D. Allison*
[P]olitical gerrymandering, a purely partisan exercise, is inappropriate for a
federal court drawing a congressional redistricting map. Even at the hands of a
legislative body, political gerrymandering is much a bloodfeud, in which revenge is
exacted by the majority against its rival. We have left it to the political arena...
because our role is limited and not because we see gerrymandering as other than what it
is: an abuse of power that, at its core, evinces a fundamental distrust of voters, serving
the self-interest of the political parties at the expense of the public good.
Judges Patrick E. Higginbotham, John Hanna, Jr., and T. John Ward1
1. INTRODUCTION
Implementing a new congressional districting plan is a politically and legally
daunting task for any state required to do it.2 The degree of difficulty a state will
encounter can be significantly increased by such demographic and structural factors as
the number of members to the U.S. House of Representatives apportioned to the state,3
* Professor of Law, University of Tulsa College of Law. L.L.M., Columbia University School of Law (1976);
J.D., University of Tulsa College of Law (1972); S.S., University of Tulsa (1968).
1. Balderas v. Tex., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25740 at **19-20 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 14, 2001) (per curiam)
(footnote omitted), affd, 536 U.S. 919 (2002).
2. The Reapportionment Act of 1929 set total membership to the U.S. House of Representatives at 435
members. Pub. L. No. 71-13, § 22(a), 46 Stat. 26 (1929) (codified as amended at 2 U.S.C. § 2a(a) (2000)).
The number of members has not changed since. See U.S. House of Representatives,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitedstateshouse of representatives (accessed Sept. 12, 2006). Each state
receives a share of the 435-member House in accordance with its relative share of the U.S. population as
determined by the latest decennial census. U.S. Const. art. 1, § 2, cl. 3, as amended by U.S. Const amend.
XIV, § 2; 2 U.S.C. § 2a(a); 13 U.S.C. § 141(a)-(b) (2000).
No matter how few residents it has, each state is guaranteed at least one U.S. House member. U.S.
Const. art. 1, § 2, cl. 3. As a result of the 2000 decennial census, seven states-Alaska, Delaware, Montana,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming-were allotted only one member of the House of
Representatives. The Green Papers, 2000 Census: Apportionment of Representatives and Electors,
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Census00/HouseAndElectors.html (last updated June 20, 2002) [hereinafter
Green Papers, Census]. In such states, there is no need for a congressional districting plan because their sole
U.S. House member is elected statewide. States allotted more than one member of the U.S. House of
Representatives must, except under very rare and unusual circumstances, design a congressional district for
each of their House members. 2 U.S.C. §§ 2a(c)(5), 2c; Branch v. Smith, 538 U.S. 254, 273-75 (2003)
(plurality opinion).
3. Creating a congressional districting plan may not be too difficult a task for the twenty-plus states with](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/tlj42&div=32&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Democracy DeLayed: The High Court Distorts Voting Rights Principles to Thwart Partially the Texas Republican Gerrymander
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most