Below v. Gardner

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court addressed the failure of the legislature to enact a valid state senate redistricting plan following the 2000 census. Applying state and federal one-person, one-vote principles, the court rejected the plans submitted by the parties because they relied on inconsistent census data and reflected partisan considerations. The court proceeded to devise its own constitutional redistricting plan for the New Hampshire Senate.

Holdings

1. The phrase requiring senate districts to be 'as nearly equal as may be in population' is at least as protective of voting rights as the federal one-person-one-vote standard; the court therefore based its decision on the state constitutional provision while using federal precedent for guidance.
2. A court-ordered state legislative redistricting plan must ordinarily achieve population equality with little more than de minimis variation; departures require historically significant state policies or unique features.
3. The existing New Hampshire Senate districts were constitutionally invalid because their 31.27% population deviation violated the state and federal guarantees of equal voting rights.
4. Because the Legislature failed to enact a valid plan in time for the 2002 election, the court was required to establish a constitutional senate redistricting plan. The court properly rejected the submitted plans and adopted a neutral plan based on PL 94-171 census data and the last validly enacted 1992 plan.
5. The court partially granted reconsideration and amended Senate Districts 12 and 13 to use the current Nashua ward boundaries, while leaving the remaining districts unchanged and retaining Manchester wards 5, 6, and 7 in District 18.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the existing New Hampshire Senate districts violated the New Hampshire Constitution and the Equal Protection Clause because of population deviations following the 2000 census.
2. What population-equality standard governs a court-ordered redistricting plan under Part II, Article 26 of the New Hampshire Constitution.
3. Whether the court should adopt SB 1 or one of the redistricting plans submitted by the parties.
4. Whether the court could establish and immediately implement its own neutral senate redistricting plan when the Legislature failed to enact a valid plan.
5. Whether the June 24 plan should be amended to account for current ward boundaries in Nashua and Manchester.

Disposition

other