Main Menu


Coalition for Non-Partisan Redistricting

2900 W Anderson Ln
Austin, TX 78757
[email protected]

  • Proposal for non-partisan congressional redistricting plans in Texas
  • Petition in Intervention of Jon Roland in Perez v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, September 6, 2011.
    • Part 1.
    • Part 2.
    • Exhibit A — Plot of curves representing alternative maps and the Standard of Proof proposed.
  • Order by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, adopting a redistricting proposal and ordering the election to be conducted according to it in those districts.
  • Texas Election Code Section 204.021, according to which election is to be held November 7, 2006.
  • Texas Election Code Chapter 203, referred to by 204.021, prescribing how to hold special elections to fill legislative vacancies.
  • Texas Election Code Section 172.024, referred to by 203.005, defining filing fees for primary election, which appears to only apply for parties that hold primaries, and not minor parties like the Libertarian Party of Texas.
  • Texas Election Code Section 141.062, referred to by 203.005, defining petition requirements.
  • Opinion by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, explaining their order.
  • Petition in Intervention of Jon Roland in LULAC v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, July 12, 2006.
    • Part 1.
    • Part 2.
    • Exhibit A — Plot of curves representing alternative maps and the Standard of Proof proposed.
    • Exhibit C — Demo of Texas congressional redistricting. (Media Player 233MB).
  • Order by U.S. District Court — June 29, 2006, calling for filing of proposals by July 14 and hearing on August 3, 2006.
  • Remand by U.S. Supreme Court — June 28, 2006.
  • Amicus curiae brief of Jon Roland in Session v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, January 20, 2005.
  • PR: Non-partisan redistricting gains support, July 1, 2003
  • PR: Testimony, House Redistricting Committee, July 2, 2003
  • Demo of Texas congressional redistricting. (Media Player 233MB) Video interview of staff of the Redistricting Division of the Texas Legislative Council, May 16, 2003, and aired on public access cable May 18, 2003. Lower-res version.  Higher-res version. You will need the latest version of RealPlayer to view it, and a high-bandwidth connection to the Internet.
  • Testimony before the Texas House Committee on Redistricting, July 2, 2003.
  • Testimony before the Texas Senate Committee on Jurisprudence, July 14, 2003.
  • 2000 Texas populations by county descending (Excel spreadsheet).
  • Texas Legislative Council
  • Texas AG Opinion: Congressional redistricting for 2003-2010: GA-0063
  • Texas Constitution: State House of Representatives Redistricting — Instructive, in that it does not mandate the Legislature approve a particular map, but allows for legislation to provide for generation of maps by a computer.
  • Redistricting Software — Used to draw district boundaries. Can be used to make districts that do not take into account voting patterns of the interests of incumbents.
  • Fixing the Reapportionment Mess, by Bill Blomberg, Dec. 7, 2000 — Calls for drawing electoral districts using impartial computer programs.
  • Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Gary King, Bernard Grofman, Andrew Gelman, and Jonathan N. Katz, in Support of Neither Party — Calls for Court to adopt “symmetry standard” for determining whether a district map is unconstitutionally gerrymandered. Does not provide “standard of proof” requested by Justice Kennedy in Vieth v. Jubelirer, but that was indicated in Roland brief above.
  • Brief Of Samuel Issacharoff, Burt Neubourne, and Richard A. Pildes as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants — Interesting argument that got no traction before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006.

Drafts of bills for automated non-partisan congressional redistricting.

  • Variant 0 — Would redraw districts every two years, split up to 50 counties.
  • Variant 1 — Would redraw districts every ten years, split up to 20 counties.

Texas Legislative Rules of Procedure

  • Senate — 78th Legislature
  • House of Representatives — 77th Legislature

Recent federal court cases

  • Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, originally in the Eastern District, Third Circuit, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
    Invitation for a solution made in Justice Kennedy’s comment:
    With no agreed upon substantive principles of fair districting, there is no basis on which to define clear, manageable, and politically neutral standards for measuring the burden a given partisan classification imposes on representational rights. Suitable standards for measuring this burden are critical to our intervention. … There are, then, weighty arguments for holding cases like these to be nonjusticiable. However, they are not so compelling that they require the Court now to bar all future partisan gerrymandering claims. … That a workable standard for measuring a gerrymander’s burden on representational rights has not yet emerged does not mean that none will emerge in the future.
    • Jenner collection — Links to most of the case pleadings
    • Votelaw Announcement June 27, 2003 — Links to some of the case pleadings
    • Reform Institute Press Release September 3, 2003 — Reform Institute Asks the U.S. Supreme Court to End Gerrymandering & Restore Competitive Elections
    • Reform Institute Press Release September 25, 2003 — U.S. Supreme Court Schedules Oral Argument in Pennsylvania Redistricting Case for December 10, 2003
    • U.S. Supreme Court docket
    • Reform Institute amicus brief — Sets forth the arguments to reject gerrymandering.
    • Texas House Democratic Caucus amicus brief — Filed by Democrat members of Texas House of Representatives.

« (Previous News)
(Next News) »