INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana is stepping into a closely watched case that tests the principle of “one person, one vote.”
It has joined a group of 21 states asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the practice of counting total population - and not just eligible voters - when carving up state election districts.
Late last month, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller signed onto a brief in the case, Evenwel v. Abbott. The case was brought by two Texas citizens who claim their voting power is diluted when districts are created because non-eligible voters - including undocumented immigrants, prisoners and children - are counted the same way as they are.
Zoeller and other attorneys general say throwing out the current system, which relies on U.S. Census data, would create havoc.
“We’d have to create a whole new system that’s fair, representational and non-partisan,” said Zoeller, “and one that could stand up in court.”
Legal experts and lawmakers are closely the outcome. If plaintiffs prevail - and only eligible voters are included when district lines are drawn - it would mean the exclusion of millions of people now counted as part of the process that takes place every 10 years.
Most states have drawn legislative maps based on total population, without regard to legal status or voter eligibility, for more than 50 years.
They’ve done so since a 1964 Supreme Court ruling that said states must draw electoral districts based on population so political power is shared equally. But the court didn’t specify the method states should use.
The process of using U.S. Census numbers has withstood legal challenges, Zoeller said, calling it a “gold standard” because it allows states to get as close as possible to a goal of “fair and effective” representation of everyone served by government.
That’s not how others see it.
The Texas-based Project on Fair Representation, which is paying for the plaintiffs’ lawyers, argues that a process that counts people who cannot legally vote violates the rights of eligible voters - especially in voting districts heavy with undocumented immigrants.
“This case presents the court with the opportunity to restore the important principle of one-person, one-vote, to the citizens of Texas and elsewhere,” Edward Blum, the group's director, said in statement after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
That principle can be hard to achieve.
Attorneys general note problems with the approach of counting only voters or citizens over age 18. The federal, 10-year census counts population but doesn’t track legal citizens in every state.
And voter registration rolls haven’t proven to be reliable.
In Indiana, Zoeller said the state is currently undergoing a voter registration purge, following a lawsuit that claimed at least 10 percent of 92 counties had a higher number of people on their active voter rolls than they do of those who are old enough to vote.