The Colorado Supreme Court rejected state legislative maps submitted by the Colorado Reapportionment Commission, remanding the maps back to the commission with instructions for addressing constitutional deficiencies.
"The supreme court holds that the finalized Reapportionment Plan is not sufficiently attentive to county boundaries to meet the requirements of article V, section 47(2), and the Colorado Reapportionment Commission has not made an adequate showing that a less drastic alternative could not have satisfied the hierarchy of constitutional criteria set forth in In re Reapportionment of the Colo. Gen. Assembly, 45 P.3d 1237 (Colo. 2002). The supreme court returns the plan to the Commission for further consideration, modification, and resubmission by 5:00 p.m. on December 6, 2011."
(Read full Colorado Supreme Court decision here)
The court's decision followed challenges to the commission's maps submitted by eleven Colorado counties and other interested parties, based primarily on violations of the constitutional requirement to maintain county integrity to the extent possible.
The commission's maps split counties more than necessary to maintain numerical parity between districts, and failed to apportion a number of "whole" state legislative districts within counties that qualified based on population.
The court also rejected the notion, advanced by Democrat plaintiffs, that "competitiveness" - a concept lacking constitutional or statutory definition -could trump constitutional criteria in drawing state legislative boundaries.
Several plaintiffs also cited the fact that the commission's maps submitted to the Colorado Supreme Court for constitutional review were introduced at the 11th hour by the commission's lone unaffiliated member, Chairman Mario Carrera, in substitution for other maps which had been scrutinized in public hearings over the course of the summer (one round of hearings in June, followed by another round of public hearings on maps incorporating public comment and testimony throughout the month of August). The maps voted out of commission and submitted to the court were not subjected to public comment or testimony, and in many cases contradicted the views expressed by individual citizens and county governments.
Since the maps failed to meet the criteria set forth in the Colorado Constitution, particularly the requirement to maintain county integrity where possible, the eleven challenges filed by county governments around the state were inevitable.
Clear The Bench Colorado had the most complete and accurate coverage of last week's hearing by the court, and even predicted the outcome (down to the 4-2 margin of decision):
Comments