Misplaced Pages

Uniform Congressional District Act

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
#298701

48-486: The Uniform Congressional District Act is a redistricting bill that requires that all members of the United States House of Representatives in the 91st United States Congress and every subsequent Congress be elected from a single member constituency unless a state had elected all of its previous representatives at large , where this requirement commenced for the 92nd United States Congress . Since

96-612: A county from being attached to other counties or parts of counties in creating a legislative district. This was overridden on the principle of basing districts on population. Today counties are frequently split among districts in forming Tennessee State Senate districts. "One person, one vote" was first applied as a standard for Congressional districts in Wesberry v. Sanders . State legislatures were supposed to redistrict according to population changes, but many had not for decades. Baker v. Carr and subsequent cases fundamentally changed

144-670: A decree of court one State could be required to be redistricted, there is no excuse for one State, two States, or 20 States to be excepted from that which others had to do." Due to the widespread support of the members of Congress that there was a pressing need to ban elections at large, both the House and the Senate passed the bill with a voice vote , although the bill did allow for Hawaii and New Mexico to elect their representatives from single-member districts two years later than all other states due to their need to draw congressional districts for

192-458: A lawsuit against the state of Tennessee, which had not conducted redistricting since 1901. Tennessee argued that the composition of legislative districts constituted a nonjusticiable political question , as the U.S. Supreme Court had held in Colegrove v. Green (1946). In a majority opinion joined by five other justices, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. held that redistricting did not qualify as

240-495: A losing candidate. These voters are left without representation. However, in multi-member proportional districts, the proportion of the vote won by a political party results in them winning the same or similar proportion of seats in a multi-member district, especially when overhang seats and leveling seats are part of the electoral system. Redistricting in the United States Redistricting in

288-469: A lot of trouble at this late hour to redistrict." However, there were members of Congress opposed to this exemption, with Senator Roman Hruska of Nebraska arguing that "The proposal before us will apply to every State in the Union except two. That is not good legislation. It certainly is not good principle," while Senator Gordon Allott of Colorado was opposed due to selfish reasons, arguing that "If under

336-500: A minority race, particularly after the enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 . In general, the requirement that all members of the House of Representatives be elected from single-member districts was widely supported by Congress, with Representative Gerald Ford stating, "I happen to feel that at-large elections are completely the wrong way for the election of Members of this body." The only real contention to this bill

384-446: A particular district to ensure a legislator's reelection or to advantage their party. In states where the legislature (or another body where a partisan majority is possible) is in charge of redistricting, the possibility of gerrymandering (the deliberate manipulation of political boundaries for electoral advantage, usually of incumbents or a specific political party ) often makes the process very politically contentious, especially when

432-537: A plurality opinion of the Court in which Justice Felix Frankfurter declared that "Courts ought not to enter this political thicket." Frankfurter believed that relief for legislative malapportionment had to be won through the political process. The case had to be put over for reargument because in conference no clear majority emerged for either side of the case. During the case, Justice Charles Evans Whittaker recused himself for health reasons, ultimately retiring from

480-412: A political question, though he remanded the case to the federal district court for further proceedings. Justice Felix Frankfurter strongly dissented, arguing that the Court's decision cast aside history and judicial restraint and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and courts. The case did not have any immediate effect on electoral districts, but it set an important precedent regarding

528-466: A second seat in 1943, and New Mexico and Hawaii would continue to elect all their representatives at large from their admission into the union until 1968 and 1970 respectively. Alabama also elected all eight of its representatives at large in 1962 . Meanwhile, those states that elected representatives from single-member districts often elected representatives from districts that were not compact, contiguous, or roughly equal in population. In 1946,

SECTION 10

#1732765523299

576-407: A single district, and avoiding the drawing of boundaries for purposes of partisan advantage or incumbent protection. Redistricting may follow other criteria depending on state and local laws: Gerrymandering , the practice of drawing district boundaries to achieve political advantage for legislators, involves the manipulation of district boundaries to leave out, or include, specific populations in

624-591: Is more prevalent for state legislative redistricting than for congressional redistricting. Some also link it to a specific year or to the decennial census. It is unclear to what extent mid-decade redistricting would be legal in those states. Apart from mid-decade redistricting initiated by state legislatures (as happened in Texas ), both federal and state courts can also order the redistricting of certain maps between-censuses (because said maps were ruled unconstitutional or against federal law, for example). Examples of this are

672-408: Is subject to political maneuvering, but some state legislatures have created independent commissions. The Uniform Congressional District Act (enacted in 1967) requires that representatives be elected from single-member districts . When a state has a single representative, that district will be state-wide. Gerrymandering in the redistricting process has been a problem since the early days of

720-404: The 1932 United States House of Representatives elections . All the states that elected some of their representatives at large (except Illinois) had gained seats from reapportionment but continued to use their previous congressional district boundaries while electing their new representatives at large. Arizona would continue to elect their representatives at large until 1946 , even after gaining

768-723: The Apportionment Act of 1911 , since the 1911 Act was still in force. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1911 Act was no longer in force even though Congress never repealed it. The previous apportionment acts required districts be contiguous, compact, and equally populated. Each state can set its own standards for congressional and legislative districts. In addition to equalizing the population of districts and complying with federal requirements, criteria may include attempting to create compact, contiguous districts, trying to keep political units and communities within

816-899: The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution to justify its ruling (specifically the Equal Protection Clause ). Wesberry v. Sanders extended Baker to the districts of the United States House of Representatives. The act was enacted by Congress in 1967 primarily due to two reasons: the fear that the courts would force elections to be conducted at large if congressional districts were not compliant with federal jurisprudence or law and that southern states may have dissolved their districts so that racial minorities would not be able to elect representatives that are from

864-647: The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Wood v. Broom , 287 U.S. 1 (1932) that the previous requirements contained within the Apportionment Act of 1911 in relation to congressional districting and the manner of how representatives were to be elected were no longer in force since the enactment of the Reapportionment Act of 1929 , there were no requirements imposed upon

912-532: The United States is the process of drawing electoral district boundaries. For the United States House of Representatives , and state legislatures, redistricting occurs after each ten-year census . The U.S. Constitution in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 provides for proportional representation in the House of Representatives. The Reapportionment Act of 1929 required that the number of seats in

960-537: The Apportionment Act of 1911 were still in force since Congress never repealed those requirements. Due to Wood , Missouri (13 seats), Kentucky (9), Virginia (9), Minnesota (9), and North Dakota (2), all elected their representatives at large while Texas elected 3 of their 21 seats at large; New York , Illinois , and Ohio each elected 2 of their seats at large; and Oklahoma , Connecticut , and Florida each elected 1 of their seats at large in

1008-616: The Court in 1962. The opinion was finally handed down in March 1962, nearly a year after it was initially argued. The Court split 6 to 2 in ruling that Baker's case was justiciable, producing, in addition to the opinion of the Court by Justice William J. Brennan , three concurring opinions and two dissenting opinions. Brennan reformulated the political question doctrine, identifying six factors to help in determining which questions are "political" in nature. Cases that are political in nature are marked by: Justice Tom C. Clark switched his vote at

SECTION 20

#1732765523299

1056-711: The House and elect members on a state-wide at-large basis. In 25 states, the state legislature has primary responsibility for creating a redistricting plan, in many cases subject to approval by the state governor . To reduce the role that legislative politics might play, thirteen states ( Alaska , Arizona , California , Colorado , Hawaii , Idaho , Michigan , Missouri , Montana , New Jersey , Ohio , Pennsylvania , and Washington ) determine congressional redistricting by an independent or bipartisan redistricting commission . Five states: Maine , New York , Rhode Island , Vermont , and Virginia give independent bodies authority to propose redistricting plans, but preserve

1104-412: The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in a 4-3 decision Colegrove v. Green that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction to interfere with malapportioned congressional districts, with Congress having the sole authority to interfere with the same. For the next fifteen years, both congressional districts and state legislative districts would often have large population imbalances. The imbalance in

1152-538: The U.S. House of Representatives be kept at a constant 435, and a 1941 act made the reapportionment among the states by population automatic after every decennial census. Reapportionment occurs at the federal level followed by redistricting at the state level. According to Colegrove v. Green , 328 U.S. 549 (1946), Article I, Section 4 left to the legislature of each state the authority to establish congressional districts; however, such decisions are subject to judicial review. In most states redistricting

1200-689: The authority of a State Legislature in designing the geographical districts from which representatives are chosen either for the State Legislature or for the Federal House of Representatives." ( Gray v. Sanders , 372 U.S. 368 (1963)). The court had previously held in Gomillion v. Lightfoot that districting claims over racial discrimination could be brought under the Fifteenth Amendment. The case arose from

1248-618: The famous " one person, one vote " standard under American jurisprudence for legislative redistricting, holding that every person had to be weighted equally in legislative apportionment. This affected numerous state legislatures that had not redistricted congressional districts for decades, despite major population shifts. It also ultimately affected the composition of state legislative districts, which in Alabama and many other states had overrepresented rural districts and underrepresented urban districts with much greater populations. This principle

1296-573: The first time in their histories. Due to this act, elections to the House of Representatives are very similar to elections to the House of Commons of Canada and the House of Commons of the United Kingdom , except that United States congressional districts are far larger in terms of population than constituencies of the Houses of Commons. Because there are, almost always, only two major parties on

1344-469: The last minute to a concurrence on the substance of Baker's claims, which would have enabled a majority that could have granted relief for Baker. Instead, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the District Court. The large majority in this case can in many ways be attributed to Brennan, who convinced Justice Potter Stewart that the case was a narrow ruling dealing only with the right to challenge

1392-415: The legislatures of Maryland and Illinois since the 2010s in order to reduce redistricting-related litigation, prevent partisan "arms races" over reapportionment and partisan gerrymandering, and reduce perceptions of nonpartisan redistricting as unilateral disarmament. To date, no such compacts have been approved by legislature or referendum. Baker v. Carr Baker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186 (1962),

1440-684: The majorities of the two houses of the legislature, or the legislature and the governor, are from different parties. Partisan domination of state legislatures and improved technology to design contiguous districts that pack opponents into as few districts as possible have led to district maps which are skewed towards one party. Consequently, many states including Florida , Georgia , Maryland , Michigan , North Carolina , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Texas and Wisconsin have succeeded in reducing or effectively eliminating competition for most House seats in those states. Some states, including New Jersey and New York , protect incumbents of both parties, reducing

1488-501: The mayor of Millington , near Memphis . The Tennessee State Constitution required that the Tennessee General Assembly 's legislative districts be redrawn every ten years to provide for districts of substantially equal population (as was to be done for congressional districts). Baker's complaint was that Tennessee had not redistricted since 1901, in response to the 1900 census . By the time of Baker's lawsuit,

Uniform Congressional District Act - Misplaced Pages Continue

1536-399: The number of competitive districts. The state and federal court systems are often involved in resolving disputes over congressional and legislative redistricting when gridlock prevents redistricting in a timely manner. In addition, those disadvantaged by a proposed redistricting plan may challenge it in state and federal courts. Justice Department approval (which is known as pre-clearance)

1584-412: The other hand, districts in the United States are inherently less representative than those in other countries that employ mixed-member proportional representation such as Germany or New Zealand . Each district in the United States only has one winner, therefore making competitive districts in particular less representative than safe districts , as close to half of all votes in a competitive race go to

1632-592: The population had shifted such that his district in Shelby County had about ten times as many residents as some of the rural districts. Rural citizens' votes were thus overrepresented compared to those of urban citizens. Baker's argument was that this discrepancy was causing him to fail to receive the "equal protection of the laws" the Fourteenth Amendment requires. Defendant Joe Carr was sued in his position as Tennessee Secretary of State . Carr

1680-433: The population of different congressional districts could have been fixed by an act of Congress but Congress failed to enact any standards and requirements concerning congressional districts and elections. Due to congressional inaction and new justices on the Supreme Court, the courts intervened in 1962 in the case Baker v. Carr which required that all state legislative districts be of roughly equal population. The court used

1728-498: The power of federal courts to address redistricting. In 1964, the Supreme Court handed down two cases, Wesberry v. Sanders and Reynolds v. Sims , that required the United States House of Representatives and state legislatures to establish electoral districts of equal population on the principle of one person, one vote . Plaintiff Charles Baker was a Republican who lived in Shelby County, Tennessee , and had served as

1776-652: The redistricting that occurred between the 2016 and 2018 elections in Pennsylvania or the redistricting that occurred in North Carolina . State constitutions and laws also mandate which body has responsibility over drawing the state legislature boundaries. In addition, those municipal governments that are elected on a district basis (as opposed to an at-large basis) also redistrict. The Reapportionment Act of 1929 did not state any size and population requirements for congressional districts, last stated in

1824-436: The republic. In recent years, critics have argued that redistricting has been used to neutralize minority voting power. Supporters say it enhances electoral competitiveness. Six states have a single representative in the United States House of Representatives , because of their low populations. These are Alaska , Delaware , North Dakota , South Dakota , Vermont , and Wyoming . These states do not need redistricting for

1872-498: The right to vote and to have their votes counted. But they are permitted to vote and their votes are counted. They go to the polls, they cast their ballots, they send their representatives to the state councils. Their complaint is simply that the representatives are not sufficiently numerous or powerful. Having declared redistricting issues justiciable in Baker , the court laid out a new test for evaluating such claims. The Court formulated

1920-942: The role of legislatures to approve them. Arkansas has a commission composed of its governor, attorney general, and secretary of state. By law, the forty-four states with more than one representative must redistrict after each decennial census to account for population shifts within the state as well as (when necessary) to add or remove congressional districts. Federal law (including the Constitution ) does not prevent states from redistricting at any time between censuses, up to and including redistricting prior to each congressional election, provided such redistricting conforms to various federal laws. However, "mid-decade" redistricting proposals (such as what occurred in 2003 in Texas ) have typically been highly controversial. Because of this, many states prohibit mid-decade redistricting, although this

1968-406: The states by Congress as to how representatives were to be elected to the United States House of Representatives . The Reapportionment Act of 1929 did not contain any requirements on how representatives were to be elected, including any requirements on how districts were to be drawn (if the state legislature chose to use districts), due to the presumption by Congress that the requirements enacted by

Uniform Congressional District Act - Misplaced Pages Continue

2016-416: The statute. Brennan also talked down Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas from their usual absolutist positions to achieve a compromise. Frankfurter, joined by Justice John Marshall Harlan II , dissented vigorously and at length, arguing that the Court had cast aside history and judicial restraint, and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and Courts. He wrote: Appellants invoke

2064-663: The ticket for an election to Congress in the United States, Congressional districts are different to districts or constituencies in Canada and the United Kingdom since the winning candidate in the United States typically wins by a majority or close to a majority while those countries that regularly have more than two candidates on the ballot typically win only by a plurality due to all three of these countries employing first-past-the-post electoral rules, making elections in United States districts arguably more representative. On

2112-493: Was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the Fourteenth Amendment 's equal protection clause, thus enabling federal courts to hear Fourteenth Amendment-based redistricting cases. The court summarized its Baker holding in a later decision as follows: "the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits

2160-624: Was formally enunciated in Reynolds v. Sims (1964). The Court decided that in states with bicameral legislatures , like Alabama, the state in this case, both houses had to be apportioned on this standard. This voided the Alabama Constitution 's provision for two state senators from each county and similar provisions elsewhere. Similarly, the Tennessee Constitution prevented counties from being split and portions of

2208-635: Was formerly required under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in certain states that have had a history of racial barriers to voting. The Supreme Court's ruling on the Pennsylvania redistricting effectively allows elected officials to select their constituents by eliminating most of the grounds for constituents to challenge district lines. In addition to the establishments of redistricting commissions in multiple states, proposals have been fielded to draft interstate compacts between states on congressional redistricting. These have been proposed in

2256-409: Was not the person who set the district lines – the state legislature had done that – but was sued ex officio as the person ultimately responsible for the conduct of elections in the state and the publication of district maps. Tennessee argued that the composition of legislative districts was essentially a political question, not a judicial one, as had been held by Colegrove v. Green ,

2304-532: Was whether there should be an exemption for Hawaii and New Mexico since they had always elected their representatives at large, with Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii stating that "because of geographical reasons, it is not very simple to district the State of Hawaii With the adoption of the amendment, an orderly transition will be possible for our State," along with Senator Clinton Anderson of New Mexico arguing that his state "has not been redistricted and it would cause

#298701