[EL] one person, one vote and uneven population growth

[Elmendorf, Christopher]

Does anyone on the list know whether any state or local government has tried to defend departures from population equality among legislative districts on the ground that the inequalities were created in anticipation of geographically uneven population growth over the projected 10-year lifespan of the map?

A map that achieves perfect population equality at the time of its adoption may of course result in less inter-district equality over time (averaged across a sequence of five legislative elections) than a map that underpopulates districts in high-growth areas.  Time-of-enactment inequalities, when in service of "dynamic population equality," would seem to me prima-facie reasonable when there are geographically concentrated demographic groups with larger-than-average family sizes, or when zoning restrictions channel most of a city's population growth into a particular area.  But I don't know whether any redistricters have self-consciously pursued the dynamic equality strategy, or whether courts have passed on it.

Thanks,

Chris

Christopher S. Elmendorf
Professor of Law
University of California at Davis
400 Mrak Hall Drive
Davis, CA 95616
tel: 530.752.5756
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110810/4c008d9d/attachment.html>