Sec. 303. Criteria for redistricting
1,244 words·~6 min read·
/bill/119/hr/4632/ih/section-303A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
The redistricting plan of a State shall be developed in accordance with the following criteria, as set forth in the following order of priority: Districts shall comply with the Constitution of the United States, including the requirement that they substantially equalize total population, without regard to age, citizenship status, or immigration status. Districts shall comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq. ), and all applicable Federal laws. Districts shall be drawn, to the extent that the totality of the circumstances warrant, to ensure the practical ability of a group protected under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq. ), whether alone or in coalition with others, to participate in the political process and to nominate candidates and to elect representatives of choice is not diluted or diminished.
For purposes of subparagraph (A), the assessment of whether a protected group has the practical ability to nominate candidates and to elect representatives of choice shall require the consideration of the following factors: Whether the group is politically cohesive. Whether there is racially polarized voting in the relevant geographic region. If there is racially polarized voting in the relevant geographic region, whether the preferred candidates of the group nevertheless receive a sufficient amount of consistent crossover support from other voters such that the group has a real opportunity to both nominate candidates and elect representatives of choice.
To the extent practicable, districts shall reflect the diversity of political opinion in the State such that no district in the State— elects exactly 3 Representatives and the nominee of one political party for President received at least 75 percent of the votes cast in the geographic area covered by the district in 2 of the 3 most recent Presidential elections; elects exactly 4 Representatives and the nominee of one political party for President received at least 80 percent of the votes cast in the geographic area covered by the district in 2 of the 3 most recent Presidential elections; or elects exactly 5 Representatives and the nominee of one political party for President received at least 83 percent of the votes cast in the geographic area covered by the district in 2 of the 3 most recent Presidential elections.
To the greatest extent practicable the State shall minimize the number of districts electing 4 Representatives. To the greatest extent practicable the State shall maximize the number of districts electing 5 Representatives. Districts shall be drawn to represent communities of interest and neighborhoods to the extent practicable after compliance with the requirements of paragraphs
(1)through (6). A community of interest is defined as an area for which the record before the entity responsible for developing and adopting the redistricting plan demonstrates the existence of broadly shared interests and representational needs, including shared interests and representational needs rooted in common ethnic, racial, economic, Indian, social, cultural, geographic, or historic identities, or arising from similar socioeconomic conditions. The term communities of interest may, if the record warrants, include political subdivisions such as counties, municipalities, Indian lands, or school districts, but shall not include common relationships with political parties or political candidates. For purposes of subparagraph (A), in considering the needs of multiple, overlapping communities of interest, the entity responsible for developing and adopting the redistricting plan shall give greater weight to those communities of interest whose representational needs would most benefit from the community’s inclusion in a single congressional district. A State may not use a redistricting plan to conduct an election if the plan’s congressional districts, when considered cumulatively on a statewide basis, have been drawn with the intent or have the effect of materially favoring or disfavoring any political party. The determination of whether a redistricting plan has the effect of materially favoring or disfavoring a political party shall be based on an evaluation of the totality of circumstances which, at a minimum, shall involve consideration of each of the following factors: Computer modeling based on relevant statewide general elections for Federal office held over the 8 years preceding the adoption of the redistricting plan setting forth the probable electoral outcomes for the plan under a range of reasonably foreseeable conditions. An analysis of whether the redistricting plan is statistically likely to result in partisan advantage or disadvantage on a statewide basis, the degree of any such advantage or disadvantage, and whether such advantage or disadvantage is likely to be present under a range of reasonably foreseeable electoral conditions. A comparison of the modeled electoral outcomes for the redistricting plan to the modeled electoral outcomes for alternative plans that demonstrably comply with the requirements of paragraphs
(1)through
(6)of subsection
(a)in order to determine whether reasonable alternatives exist that would result in materially lower levels of partisan advantage or disadvantage on a statewide basis. For purposes of this subparagraph, alternative plans considered may include both actual plans proposed during the redistricting process and other plans prepared for purposes of comparison. Any other relevant information, including how broad support for the redistricting plan was among members of the entity responsible for developing and adopting the plan and whether the processes leading to the development and adoption of the plan were transparent and equally open to all members of the entity and to the public. A court may rely on all available evidence when determining whether a redistricting plan was drawn with the intent to materially favor or disfavor a political party, including evidence of the partisan effects of a plan, the degree of support the plan received from members of the entity responsible for developing and adopting the plan, and whether the processes leading to development and adoption of the plan were transparent and equally open to all members of the entity and to the public. No redistricting plan shall be found to be in violation of paragraph
(1)because of the proper application of the criteria set forth in paragraphs
(1)through
(6)of subsection (a), unless one or more alternative plans could have complied with such paragraphs without having the effect of materially favoring or disfavoring a political party. In developing the redistricting plan for the State, the State may not take into consideration any of the following factors, except as necessary to comply with the criteria described in paragraphs
(1)through
(6)of subsection (a), to achieve partisan fairness and comply with subsection (b), and to enable the redistricting plan to be measured against the external metrics described in section 304(c): The residence of any Member of the House of Representatives, candidate, or any other individual who is eligible to serve as a Member of the House of Representatives from the State. The political party affiliation or voting history of the population of a district. A State may not rely upon criteria, districting principles, or other policies of the State which are not set forth in this section to justify non-compliance with the requirements of this section. This section applies to any authority, whether appointed, elected, judicial, or otherwise, responsible for enacting the congressional redistricting plan of a State. This section applies to any congressional redistricting plan enacted following the regular decennial census conducted during 2030. If any provision of this section, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this section, and the application of such provision to any other person or circumstance, shall not be affected by the holding.
Connectionstraces to 1
Citation graph
cites case law
Sec. 303
Criteria for redistricting
Cites 1Cited by 0 across 0 sources