and bodies politic with perpetual existence unless disincorporated according to law,” and § 53A-2-101, allowing the state to create, merge, and dissolve school districts. The statutes cited, however, actually support local city and school board independence. We do not doubt that these statutes give Utah more power over the establishment and disestablishment of local governments than it would have over private corporations, but that is not the issue here. By defining municipalities as “political subdivisions” and “bodies politic,” Utah law recognizes that they are more than merely arms of the state. See Ambus, 995 F.2d at 995 (giving substantial weight to statutory and constitutional language describing school districts as “political subdivisions”); Utah Const. Art. XI, § 1 (<HOLDING>); id. § 8 (implicitly acknowledging counties,
recognizing exception to aia where plaintiff is left with no alternative legal remedy recognizing the importance of counties as political subdivisions of the state of north carolina and observing that the state constitutions limitations upon redistricting and apportionment uphold what the united states supreme court has termed traditional districting principles    such as compactness contiguity and respect for political subdivisions  citation omitted quoting shaw i 509 us at 647 113 s ct at 2827 125 l ed 2d at 528 recognizing rule recognizing this as the general rule recognizing utah counties as legal subdivisions