Supreme Court to Review Texas
Redistricting
Yahoo News/AP
By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
December 12, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court said Monday it would consider the
constitutionality of a Texas congressional map engineered by Rep. Tom DeLay
that helped Republicans gain seats in Congress.
The 2003 boundaries helped Republicans win 21 of the state's 32 seats in
Congress in the last election_ up from 15. They were approved amid a nasty
battle between Republican leaders and Democrats and minority groups in
Texas.
The contentiousness also reached Washington, where the Justice Department
approved the plan although staff lawyers concluded that it diluted minority
voting rights. Because of past discrimination against minority voters, Texas is
required to get Justice Department approval for any voting changes to ensure
they don't undercut minority voting.
Justices will consider a constitutional challenge to the boundaries filed by
various opponents. The court will hear two hours of arguments in four separate
appeals. Lawyers have been told the case will be argued March 1, so the outcome
could affect 2006 elections.
The legal battle at the Supreme Court was over the unusual timing of the
Texas redistricting, among other things. Under the Constitution, states must
adjust their congressional district lines every 10 years to account for
population shifts.
But in Texas the boundaries were redrawn twice after the 2000 census, first
by a court, then by state lawmakers in a second round promoted by DeLay.
DeLay spokesman Kevin Madden said Monday, "The effort to deliver a new
congressional map was founded in the belief that a history of gerrymandering
efforts by Democrats in Texas had resulted in an unfair representation of Texas
voters."
DeLay had to step down as House Majority Leader earlier this year after he
was indicted in Texas on state money laundering charges.
DeLay and two people who oversaw his fundraising activities are accused of
funneling prohibited corporate political money through the national Republican
Party to state GOP legislative candidates. Texas law prohibits spending
corporate money on the election or defeat of a candidate.
The alleged scheme was part of a plan DeLay and others set in motion to help
Republicans win control of the Texas House in 2002 elections. The Republican
Legislature then adopted a DeLay-backed congressional voting district map.
Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, called lawmakers back for three special
sessions in 2003 to tackle the map, despite vehement opposition from Democrats
who walked out and even left the state to halt progress.
DeLay was later rebuked by the House Ethics Committee for using the Federal
Aviation Administration to track down a private plane that shuttled some
Democratic lawmakers out of the state.
The Texas case has been to the Supreme Court once before, and justices
ordered a lower court to reconsider the boundaries following a decision in
another redistricting case from Pennsylvania. Justices in that splintered
opinion left little room for lawsuits claiming that political gerrymandering
— drawing a map to give one political party an advantage — violates
the "one-person, one-vote" principle protected in the Constitution.
However, now the court will have a chance to revisit that issue and the
outcome could change because the court's membership is changing. Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor is retiring, and Chief Justice John Roberts has been on the bench
just a few months.
"It's all the more intriguing given the likelihood that Justice O'Connor
won't be sitting in the case," said Richard Hasen, a professor at Loyola Law
School who was surprised the court agreed to hear the case.
A lower court panel ruled that the map is constitutional and does not
violate federal voting rights law.
The map was used in 2004 elections, and Texas elected one additional black
congressman besides the six additional GOP members. Of the 32 seats, six
delegation members are Hispanic and three are black. Minority and Democratic
groups argue that the map reduced by two the number of districts considered
"safe" for minority candidates.
After Texas decided to redraw its lines, two other states — Colorado
and Georgia — also undertook a second round of redistricting.
Paul M. Smith, a Washington attorney representing challengers to the Texas
map, told justices that the redoing of maps "is a symptom of the excessively
partisan approach to redistricting now in vogue."
"When legislators choose to take such actions, they should be required to
demonstrate some legitimate governmental purpose," he wrote in a filing.
The cases are League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 05-204;
Travis County v. Perry, 05-254; Jackson v. Perry, 05-276; GI Forum of Texas v.
Perry, 05-439.
Associated Press writer Suzanne Gamboa contributed to this report.
|