| Abstract: | A new round of revisions in the geographical districts usedto elect federal, state, and local legislators in the UnitedStates has followed the 2000 census of population. While legislatorsthemselves typically have the initial responsibility to performthis frequently contentious task, courts play an active supervisoryrole as well. This article reviews how United States SupremeCourt decisions concerning the post-1990 round of redistrictinghave resulted in the rules concerning the design of districtsbeing more ambiguous in this post-2000 round. This, it is argued,enhances the opportunity to gerrymander for partisan or otherpolitical reasons, a practice that is virtually immune to judicialinvalidation. The article also notes the more active role ofstate courts in this process. The districting process now involvesnot only competing districting plans, but more often than inprevious rounds, competing courts as well. |
