Supreme Court Clarifies Role of Technology and “One Person, One Vote” Rule

more+
less-

With the assistance of modern technology, state Congressional districts can be divided down to a single person, seemingly satisfying the “one person, one vote” requirement. However, as the U.S. Supreme Court recently highlighted, mathematical equality is not required to ensure that a redistricting plan will pass constitutional scrutiny.

In Tennant v. Jefferson County Commission, the Supreme Court held that West Virginia’s 2011 congressional redistricting plan does not violate the “one person, one vote” principle. The per curium decision confirmed that states should still be given some flexibility in applying the standard and that “zero variance” is not the new test of constitutionality, despite advances in mapping technology.

The Facts of the Case

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Constitutional Law Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Donald Scarinci, Scarinci Hollenbeck | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »