Suit claims IRC packed districts to dilute vote

Two groups of Arizona voters filed suit last Friday seeking a court order to invalidate the unconstitutional and partisan legislative and congressional district boundaries approved by the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. The suits hold that while both the U.S. and Arizona Constitution require that legislative districts be equal in population, or as nearly equal as practicable, the legislative districts created by the IRC are unjustifiably unequal.

Plaintiffs claim that more than half the districts are “over-populated” and virtually all of the rest are “under-populated.” Although limited deviations can be tolerated if based on legitimate reasons, the extent of these deviations alone should render the district boundaries illegal.

In the current maps, almost every district that leans Republican is over-populated, or “packed” with Republican voters and, in some cases, significantly so. Almost every single district that leans Democratic is under-populated. The maps were just approved by the DOJ.

The challenged maps give Democrats an advantage, despite them being far outnumbered in registration numbers across the State by Republicans and Independents.

Just recently, the Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the November 2011 removal of Commission Chair Colleen Mathis by Governor Brewer, with the concurrence of 2/3 of the Arizona State Senate, was not based on an allegation that any non-public meeting of a quorum of the Commission occurred.

The plaintiffs make such allegations. Plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that it is the IRC’s pattern of overpopulating some districts and under-populating others proves the IRC operated with an improper partisan bias, flagrantly violated its legal obligation to be “independent,” and intentionally violated the U.S. and Arizona Constitutions.

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that courts may examine whether the Commission followed the mandated procedure. “If it did not, the Commission violated the constitution as clearly as if it had violated the Equal Protection Clause by adopting legislation that lacks a reasonable basis,” wrote then-Chief Justice Ruth McGregor in 2009 in Arizona Minority Coalition for Fair Redistricting v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.

The effect of over-populating districts and under-populating districts is that voters in under-populated districts have more voting strength than in the over populated districts.

The suit alleges that this pattern violates the equal protection clause of the U.S Constitution, the “one man one vote” rulings of the United States Supreme Court, and the requirements of the Arizona Constitution. And, the U.S. Supreme Court has already found this type of partisan overpopulating and under-populating of districts unconstitutional in Larios v. Cox.

“It can’t be an accident,” said Wesley W. Harris, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuits. “How does this happy coincidence for Democrats just happen that almost every one of the Republican districts has been hyper-packed and every one of their districts has too few people in it? If this isn’t proof that the Commission worked to help the Democrats and hurt Republicans, I don’t know what is,” he continued.

“This Commission owed it to the people of Arizona to be fair and independent. It clearly wasn’t either fair or independent and flagrantly violated its public trust. These districts should be thrown out, the Commission Members who violated their duty should be ashamed of themselves and they should resign in disgrace.”

The case against the congressional districts also accuses the Commission of acting in a partisan, result-oriented manner. The plaintiffs allege that the Commission ignored the constitution’s mandatory procedures for developing the congressional map.

Named as defendants in both suits are Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, and Commissioners Colleen Mathis, Linda C. McNulty, José M. Herrera, Scott D. Freeman, and Richard Stertz and Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett. All of these individuals are sued only in their official capacities.

Related articles:

Suit alleges IRC’s Mathis offered quid pro quo

Republican officials and candidates sue IRC

About ADI Staff Reporter 12168 Articles
Under the leadership of Editor-in -Chief Huey Freeman, our team of staff reporters bring accurate,timely, and complete news coverage.