In a huge win for voting rights, the Supreme Court today unanimously affirmed the long-standing “one-person, one-vote” principle in redistricting, which was at the heart of a dispute originating in the Texas case of Evenwel v. Abbott. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for the case on December 8, 2015. Today’s ruling ensures that every person counts and every person receives representation in their state legislatures.
At issue in Evenwel was whether or not state legislatures may use total population in apportioning state legislative districts, rather than requiring them to use other methods of drawing legislative districts, including citizen voting age population (CVAP). In Evenwel, the challengers argued that Texas’ use of total population was unconstitutional because it left those living in legislative districts with higher populations of eligible voters with diminished political representation from those living in districts with smaller numbers of eligible voters.
What the challengers failed to acknowledge in this case, however, is that by only counting eligible voters, the state would leave out many individuals who, while are not currently eligible voters, do nevertheless have families, pay taxes, and participate in their communities. These individuals include immigrants, children, those with mental disabilities, and in many cases, people who were convicted of felonies.
That state legislatures may use total population to apportion state legislative districts has been a guiding principle in redistricting since the 1960s. Regardless of their ability to currently vote, children and other nonvoters nevertheless deserve the same political representation in their state legislatures. State legislators make significant policy decisions and funding decisions for things like public parks, roads, and schools. These decisions affect all individuals living in the district, not just eligible voters. As Justice Ginsburg states in her opinion, “… the Framers of the Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment comprehended [that] representatives serve all residents, not just those eligible to vote. Nonvoters have an important stake in many policy debates and in receiving constituent services.”
While the Supreme Court’s decision does not mandate using total population, the opinion strongly favors the use of total population to draw state legislative districts. In this vein, Justice Ginsburg’s opinion emphasizes the constitutional history, the Supreme Court’s precedent, and longstanding practice to uphold the use of total population.
Today’s decision in Evenwel is significant for a number of reasons. Perhaps most notably, it ensures the promise of our democracy: that every person in this country has political representation and legislators’ decisions reflect the best interests of the whole population, rather than just those who can vote.
