DOJ issues Guidance on Redistricting and Retrogression (Section 5 VRA)Reported 1/19 by: Edward Still
The Civil Rights
Division has issued the Guidance Concerning Redistricting and
Retrogression. You can find this at 66 Fed. Reg. 5412 or on line at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a010118c.html (scroll down to
Justice Department and you have a choice of seeing the document in
text or as a PDF document). On Shaw and
benchmarks, the Guidance says: "Therefore, a
redistricting plan drawn to replace a plan found by a federal court
to violate Shaw v. Reno will be compared with the last legally
enforceable plan predating the unconstitutional plan. Absent such a
finding of unconstitutionality under Shaw by a federal court, the
last legally enforceable plan will serve as the benchmark for
Section 5 review. Therefore, a jurisdiction is not required to
address the constitutionality of its benchmark plan when submitting
a redistricting plan and the question of whether the benchmark plan
is constitutional will not be considered during the Department's
Section 5 review." Under
"Alternatives to Retrogressive Plans," the Guidance
says: "Preventing
retrogression under Section 5 does not require jurisdictions to
violate the one-person one-vote principle. See 52 FR 488 (Jan. 6,
1987). Similarly, preventing retrogression under Section 5 does not
require jurisdictions to violate Shaw v. Reno and related cases.
... "In assessing whether a
less retrogressive alternative plan can reasonably be drawn, the
geographic compactness of a jurisdiction's minority population will
be a factor in the Department's analysis. ..." The Guidance reiterates the policy cited in the letter to Arizona about the Section using PL 94-171 data to review plans even if some other data was used by the jurisdiction. And there is helpful guidance on how to count those who reported multiple races. |