The Oregon Supreme Court has issued a decision that granted the bipartisan legislative request to extend the timeline to finish the redistricting process to September 27. The Constitution gives the Legislature authority to redraw legislative and congressional boundaries but that authority was put in jeopardy by delays in U.S. Census data.

The opinion, issued by Chief Justice Walters, would keep the process from the partisan Secretary of State and keep the process in the legislature. The Secretary of State, Shemia Fagan, opposed the Legislature, hoping to take control of the redistricting process. The Oregon Supreme Court rejected her partisan attempt, calling her legal arguments flawed.

“We have had a good working relationship among the Senate members of the committee,” Senator Tim Knopp (R-Bend), vice-chair of the Redistricting Committee, said. “Election integrity and fair districts live to fight another day because of this decision. It ensures that we can continue to work together to ensure that Oregonians can pick their representatives fairly.”

The Supreme Court will issue a writ of mandamus allowing the Legislature to have the first chance to come up with a redistricting plan. The revised deadlines would require an emergency special session. It would give the Legislature until September 27 to enact a redistricting plan, ensuring it becomes effective by February 1, 2022.

The High Court said, in a summary document:

If it were possible for the State of Oregon to comply with all the requirements of Article IV, section 6, the Court explained, it would require that it do so. But here, where it is not possible for the state to create a reapportionment plan based on federal census data and still comply with the constitutionally prescribed deadlines, and where it is possible for the state to fulfill its paramount duties in compliance with modified deadlines, the Court concluded that it had authority to direct the state to comply with modified deadlines.

“Oregonians expect their district to be fairly drawn,” Senate Republican Leader, Fred Girod said. “The most important principles for Republicans are ‘One-Person-One-Vote’ and upholding the Voting Rights Act. Gerrymandering is unacceptable and by keeping this process in the Legislature, we have a chance to come to a bipartisan agreement to draw fair lines.”

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

The High Court restated the revised plan, with dates:

REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN BY LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

• 1. If the Legislative Assembly enacts a plan, the following revised deadlines apply:
  • a. The Legislative Assembly will enact a plan on or before Monday, September 27, 2021, and may do so in an emergency session rather than its regular session.
  • b. Objections by electors are due by Monday, October 25, 2021.
    • i. Responses by the Legislative Assembly, Secretary of State, or others, as well as amicus briefs (discouraged) are due by Monday, November 8, 2021.
    • ii. Any reply briefs, though discouraged, are due by Monday, November 15, 2021.
  • c. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan complies with applicable law:
    • i. A Supreme Court opinion approving the plan will be filed by Monday, November 22, 2021, and
    • ii. The reapportionment plan will become effective January 1, 2022, for purposes of Or Const, Art IV, § 6(6)(b), only.
  • d. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan requires corrections, a Supreme Court opinion to that effect will be filed by Monday, December 6, 2021, and the plan will be sent to the Secretary of State for changes.
    • i. The revisions by the Secretary of State are due by Monday, January 17, 2022.
    • ii. The Supreme Court will approve the revisions or make any necessary additional corrections by Monday, January 31, 2022.
      

REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN BY SECRETARY OF STATE

• 2. If the Legislative Assembly does not enact a plan by September 27, 2021, the following revised deadlines apply:
  • a. If the Legislative Assembly fails to enact a plan by September 27, 2021, the Secretary of State’s plan is due by Monday, October 18, 2021.
  • b. Objections by electors are due by Monday, November 15, 2021.
    • i. Responses by the Legislative Assembly, Secretary of State, or others, as well as amicus briefs (discouraged) are due by Monday, November 29, 2021.
    • ii. Any reply briefs, though discouraged, are due by Monday, December 6, 2021.
  • c. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan complies with applicable law:
    • i. A Supreme Court opinion approving the plan will be filed by Monday, December 13, 2021.
    • ii. The reapportionment plan will become effective January 1, 2022, for purposes of Or Const, Art IV, § 6(6)(b), only.
  • d. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan requires corrections, a Supreme Court opinion to that effect will be filed by Monday, December 27, 2021, and the plan will be returned to the Secretary of State for changes.
    • i. The revisions by the Secretary of State are due by Monday, January 24, 2022.
    • ii. The Supreme Court will approve the revisions or make any necessary additional corrections by Monday, February 7, 2022.
  
  --Staff Reports
  
  

  Post Date: 2021-04-09 09:21:16

  Last Update: 2021-04-09 09:57:42