Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (578 U.S. 253)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 20, 2016 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 578 U.S. 253 · 136 S. Ct. 1301
- Decided
- April 20, 2016
- Term
- October Term 2015
- Vote
- 8–0
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. Appellants, a group of Arizona voters, challenge a redistricting plan for the State's legislature on the ground that the plan's districts are insufficiently equal in population. See Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 577, 84 S.Ct. 1362, 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964). Because the maximum population deviation between the largest and the smallest district is less than 10%, the appellants cannot simply rely upon the numbers to show that the plan violates the Constitution. See Brown v. Thomson, 462 U.S. 835, 842, 103 S.Ct. 2690, 77 L.Ed.2d 214 (1983). Nor have appellants adequately supported their contentions with other evidence. We consequently affirm a 3-judge Federal District Court decision upholding the plan. I In 2000, Arizona voters, using the initiative process, amended the Arizona Constitution to provide for an independent redistricting commission. See Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Comm'n, 576 U.S. ----, ----, 135 S.Ct. 2652, 2677, 7192 L.Ed.2d 704 (2015) (upholding the amendment as consistent with federal constitutional and statutory law). Each decade, the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments creates three slates of individuals: one slate of 10 Republicans, one slate of 10 Democrats, and one slate of 5 individuals not affiliated with any political party. The majority and minority leader…
Excerpt of a 19,464-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.