the state legislature controls the redistricting process in most states.
the state legislature controls the redistricting process in most states.
who controls the redistricting process in most states?
the state legislature
currently, 21 u.s. states have some form of non-partisan or bipartisan redistricting commission. of these 21 states, 13 use redistricting commissions to exclusively draw electoral district boundaries (see below). a 14th state, iowa, uses a special redistricting process that uses neither the state legislature nor an independent redistricting commission to draw electoral district boundaries (see below).









































in 2015, the u.s. supreme court ruled in arizona state legislature v. arizona independent redistricting commission that redistricting commissions such as arizona's, whose redistricting commission process is independent of the state legislature, were constitutional.









































table key – for purposes of this table:
redistricting commission
after the 2000 u.s. census, in 2001 the massachusetts house, under finneran's leadership, drew up new house districts. the redistricting was challenged in federal court, in a civil case, by the black political task force and others, as unfair to minority voters by constructing districts intended to favor white incumbents to the detriment of candidates preferred by blacks. in 2004, a three-judge federal court panel held that the redistricting plan violated section 2 of the voting rights act of 1965 by discriminating against black voters. it held that 17 massachusetts house districts were enjoined from being used in the 2004 election, that the legislature was given six weeks to create an acceptable plan for the districts, and the plaintiff black political task force could comment on proposed districts before being approved by the court. in a footnote to the decision, the court criticized finneran, implying that he misled the court when he testified that he had little involvement in the redistricting process. the court said "although speaker finneran denied any involvement in the redistricting process, the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests the opposite conclusion." finneran's attorney, egbert, claimed that the statement was "simply wrong." (under state law and house rules, finneran was free to participate in drafting the legislative map before it was released.) federal prosecutors indicted finneran in june 2005 in a criminal case, charging him with perjury and obstruction of justice for misrepresenting his participation in the redistricting process. the indictment cited eight meetings that he held about redistricting.
thomas finneran