Tuesday, January 25, 2022
Hawai'i Free Press

Current Articles | Archives

Friday, September 25, 2015
Hawaii Apportionment Plaintiffs to Supreme Court: ‘Count Everyone’
By Robert Thomas @ 12:56 PM :: 3287 Views :: Office of Elections

Amici Brief In SCOTUS Reapportionment Case: Close Scrutiny For Anything Less Than Total Population

by Robert Thomas, InverseCondemnation, September 25, 2015

Please forgive the deviation (a pun for our election law colleagues) from the blog's usual land use and takings fare, but frequent readers understand that we also have an interest in election law, and occasionally post up items of interest.

Today we filed this amici brief in Evenwel v. Abbott, No. 14-940, the case on appeal to the Supreme Court which asks which "population" states must use when reapportioning their state legislatures and drawing district boundaries. We've covered this case, as well as our own case in which we (unsuccessfully) challenged Hawaii's practice of basing reapportionment on  "permanent residents" and excluding military personnel and their families.

Our brief argues:

The parties in this case suggest answers to a deceptively simple question: who constitutes the body politic in the states? This question is one the Court has avoided answering explicitly for nearly half a century. Amici respectfully suggest that the Court may continue to do so, but at the same time should provide guidance to state legislatures and reapportionment commissions by holding that it is always permissible under the Equal Protection Clause for states—like Texas and 47 others—to include all Census-counted usual residents in their reapportionment populations, even when this means that non-citizens and non-voters are represented in state legislatures as equally as citizens of voting age. Doing so upholds the first and overriding principle of the Equal Protection Clause, representational equality.  At first blush, it may seem odd to conclude that those who are not United States citizens and those who are not eligible to vote, are deserving of representation in our state legislatures—at least until one reads the text of the Equal Protection Clause and studies its subsequent history and understands that elected officials represent all “persons,” not only citizens or those who can elevate them to office.

But this Court has never required states to apportion their legislatures using total population, although it is “the de facto national policy.” Thus, amici also note that the Equal Protection Clause and the “one-person, one-vote” principle do not require that a state include non-citizens and non-voters in the reapportionment population, if a state chooses to favor the voting equality principle instead of representational equality. What the Equal Protection Clause requires is that if a state decides to do so, it must meet a more exacting standard than the “rational basis” test. Thus, if a state bases reapportionment on some population other than total Census-counted usual residents, it must under Burns demonstrate that the resulting plan is “substantially similar” to one based on a “permissible population basis” such as total population, state citizens, or U.S. citizens.  It does so by employing “[a]n appropriately defined and uniformly applied requirement”  when deciding whom to count and whom to exclude.

This issue has been addressed in various ways by the lower courts. The Ninth Circuit favors representational equality over voting power and requires use of total population, while the Fourth and Fifth Circuits, allow states to freely choose whom to count and whom, or whether, to exclude.  In other words, the Ninth Circuit held that states must use total population, while the Fourth and Fifth Circuit held they merely may. Amici do not suggest that states must use one or the other, but urge a more pragmatic rule: they ask this Court to hold that if a state chooses to include less than all of its Census-counted usual residents, then a reviewing court must apply heightened scrutiny and the state should be required to show a well-defined and uniformly applied standard supporting its choice and prove that it approximates a plan that is based on a “permissible population basis” such as total population or U.S. or state citizens, before it may to deprive any person—voter or not, citizen or not—of representational equality. In the absence of such a compelling showing, states must use the total Census-counted population as their reapportionment population basis.

Stay tuned if this sort of thing is your cup of tea. We'll post up the other merits and amici briefs, and have a preview of the issues soon.

PDF: Brief of Hawaii Reapportionment Plaintiffs (David Brostrom, Andrew Walden) as Amici Curiae Supporting Appel...

 

Links

TEXT "follow HawaiiFreePress" to 40404

Register to Vote

2aHawaii

808 Silent Majority

ACA Signups Hawaii

Alliance Defending Freedom

Aloha Pregnancy Care Center

American Council of Trustees and Alumni

AntiPlanner

Antonio Gramsci Reading List

A Place for Women in Waipio

Astronomy Hawaii

Back da Blue Hawaii

Ballotpedia Hawaii

Better Hawaii

Broken Trust

Build More Hawaiian Homes Working Group

ChinaTownWatch.com

Christian Homeschoolers of Hawaii

Cliff Slater's Second Opinion

DVids Hawaii

FIRE

Fix Oahu!

Frontline: The Fixers

Genetic Literacy Project

Grassroot Institute

Habele.org

Hawaii Aquarium Fish Report

Hawaii Aviation Preservation Society

Hawaii Catholic TV

Hawaii Christian Coalition

Hawaii Cigar Association

Hawaii Coalition Against Legalized Gambling

Hawaii ConCon Info

Hawaii Credit Union Watch

Hawaii Crop Improvement Association

Hawaii Debt Clock

Hawaii Defense Foundation

Hawaii Family Advocates

Hawaii Family Forum

Hawaii Farmers and Ranchers United

Hawaii Farmer's Daughter

Hawaii Federalist Society

Hawaii Federation of Republican Women

Hawaii Future Project

Hawaii Gathering of Eagles

Hawaii History Blog

Hawaii Homeschool Association

Hawaii Jihadi Trial

Hawaii Legal News

Hawaii Life Alliance

Hawaii March for Life

Hawaii's Partnership for Appropriate & Compassionate Care

Hawaii Public Charter School Network

Hawaii Rifle Association

Hawaii Shippers Council

Hawaii Smokers Alliance

Hawaii State Data Lab

Hawaii Together

HIEC.Coop

HiFiCo

Hiram Fong Papers

Homeschool Legal Defense Hawaii

Honolulu Navy League

Honolulu Traffic

House Minority Blog

Imua TMT

Inouye-Kwock, NYT 1992

Inside the Nature Conservancy

Inverse Condemnation

Investigative Project on Terrorism

July 4 in Hawaii

Kakaako Cares

Keep Hawaii's Heroes

Land and Power in Hawaii

Legislative Committee Analysis Tool

Lessons in Firearm Education

Lingle Years

Malulani Foundation

Managed Care Matters -- Hawaii

Malama Pregnancy Center of Maui

Mauna Kea Recreational Users Group

MentalIllnessPolicy.org

Military Home Educators' Network Oahu

Missile Defense Advocacy

MIS Veterans Hawaii

NAMI Hawaii

Natatorium.org

National Christian Foundation Hawaii

National Parents Org Hawaii

NFIB Hawaii News

No GMO Means No Aloha

Not Dead Yet, Hawaii

NRA-ILA Hawaii

Oahu Alternative Transport

Obookiah

OHA Lies

Opt Out Today

OurFutureHawaii.com

Patients Rights Council Hawaii

PEACE Hawaii

People vs Machine

Pritchett Cartoons

Pro-GMO Hawaii

P.U.E.O.

RailRipoff.com

Rental by Owner Awareness Assn

ReRoute the Rail

Research Institute for Hawaii USA

Rick Hamada Show

RJ Rummel

Robotics Organizing Committee

Save Dillingham Airfield

School Choice in Hawaii

SenatorFong.com

Sink the Jones Act

Statehood for Guam

Tax Foundation of Hawaii

The Real Hanabusa

Time Out Honolulu

Trustee Akina KWO Columns

UCC Truths

US Tax Foundation Hawaii Info

VAREP Honolulu

Waagey.org

West Maui Taxpayers Association

What Natalie Thinks

Whole Life Hawaii

Yes2TMT