State Capitol Highlights

Supreme Court rules in ‘one person, one vote’ case 

AUSTIN — On a unanimous vote of 8-0, the U.S. Supreme Court on April 4 affirmed that states may continue to draw legislative districts based on total population.

In the Texas case, Evenwel v. Abbott, the question presented to the high court on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas was whether the one-person, one-vote principle of the Fourteenth Amendment creates a “judicially enforceable right ensuring that the districting process does not deny voters an equal vote.”

Court documents explain the basis of the case this way: “In 2013, the Texas Legislature enacted a state Senate map creating districts that, while roughly equal in terms of total population, grossly malapportioned voters. Appellants, who live in Senate districts significantly overpopulated with voters, brought a one-person, one vote challenge, which the three-judge district court below dismissed for failure to state a claim. The district court held that appellants’ constitutional challenge is a judicially unreviewable political question.”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote the court’s main opinion, stated that “nonvoters have an important stake in many policy debates — children, their parents, even their grandparents, for example, have a stake in a strong public education system — and in receiving constituent services, such as help navigating public-benefits bureaucracies. By ensuring that each representative is subject to requests and suggestions from the same number of constituents, total-population apportionment promotes equitable and effective representation.”

However, while the court affirmed that to draw districts based on total population remains constitutional, it did not suggest that to draw legislative districts based on the total number of registered voters would be unconstitutional. 

To read the full article, subscribe to the Van Zandt News or pick up a copy from one of our vendors.