Keith Lance, et al. v. Mike Coffman, Colorado Secretary of State (549 U.S. 437)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 5, 2007 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 549 U.S. 437 · 127 S. Ct. 1194
- Decided
- March 5, 2007
- Term
- October Term 2006
- Vote
- 9–0
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. The Elections Clause of the United States Constitution provides that the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.” Art. I, §4, cl. 1 (emphasis added). When Colorado legislators were unable to redraw congressional districts after the 2000 census to accommodate an additional Representative, a state court did it for them. See Beauprez v. Avalos, 42 P. 3d 642 (Colo. 2002). The legislature was able to pass a redistricting plan in 2003, which Colorado’s Governor signed into law. See Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. §2-1-101. Colorado’s attorney general, however, filed an original action in the Colorado Supreme Court to enjoin Colorado’s secretary of state from implementing this new plan, noting that Article V, §44, of the Colorado Constitution limits redistricting to once per census. The Colorado General Assembly intervened in the action to defend its plan. The Colorado Supreme Court granted the injunction, holding that “judicially-created districts are just as binding and permanent as districts created by the General Assembly,” and that the court-drawn plan must remain in effect until the next decennial census. People ex rel. Salazar v. Davidson, 79 P. 3d 1221, 1231 (2003), cert.…
Excerpt of a 10,264-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.