While the Legislature rigorously adheres to the "one person, one vote" rule in drawing new district lines for itself and Congressional seats within the state every 10 years, the principle has been ignored when it comes to electing judges.
The
While the Legislature rigorously adheres to the "one person, one vote" rule in drawing new district lines for itself and Congressional seats within the state every 10 years, the principle has been ignored when it comes to electing judges.
The legislative rigor, of course, is based on mandates issued by judges at both the state and federal level — starting with the landmark 1962 U.S. Supreme Court case of Baker vs. Carr, inspired by the Tennessee Legislature's failure to go through redistricting for a half-century or so.
Federal judges are not elected, but Tennessee's trial court judges are. Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey says it's ironic that judges have mandated redistricting for congressional and legislative elections, but not for judicial elections. Ramsey says he's "probably" going to push a bill for redistricting this year.
Not since 1984 has the Legislature reapportioned Tennessee's 31 judicial districts, which draw the borders for jurisdiction of judges, district attorneys general and public defenders. Legislative and congressional districts have been overhauled three times since then.
If there is no change this year, judges will be elected in 2014 across the state under the old district lines. Since judges, district attorneys general and public defenders serve eight-year terms, that means those who serve out their new terms will be in office under the 1984 district lines in 2022, when they'll be up for re-election again.
At that point, Ramsey observes, it will be time for another required round of legislative and congressional redistricting. With all the turmoil and debate that will cause, the Senate speaker says, there's no way lawmakers will want to throw judicial redistricting into the mix as well. So that would mean putting off judicial redistricting for another eight years, until 2030. Thus, a half-century or so will pass without redistricting, just as with legislative redistricting back in the pre-Baker vs. Carr days.
Ramsey says he'd never really thought about judicial redistricting until legislative staff attorneys pointed out the situation. At his request, staff lawyers drafted a sample map of how redistricting might work. The first expanded the number of districts from 31 to 33. He didn't like that, so another version was drafted reducing the number to 29 districts.
Tennessee's overall population has grown from 4.5 million in 1984 to 6.4 million today, based on 2011 U.S. Census figures. If you divide the 6.4 million by 31 districts, the average ideal size would be about 206,000.
There are some dramatic differences in population of the present judicial districts. Some are quite small in population, probably because of the legislative politics at work back in 1984.
Warren and Van Buren counties, for example, comprise a single district and have a combined population of about 45,000. (Back in 1984, those counties were served by the late Rep. Shelby Rhinehart, D-Spencer, a legendary wheeler and dealer in Legislatorland.)
Coffee County (population of about 53,000) is a single-county district. So is Anderson County (75,000).
It makes sense for geographic and organizational purposes, of course, that large, urban counties should be a single district unto themselves. Ramsey's premise, basically, is that counties with more than 100,000 in population should be a single district with others "grouped together in common-sense form." He says that about half the districts would be unchanged under the rough draft plan. The big changes would occur in rural and suburban areas.
An interrelated matter is the number of judges per district and the number of assistants a district attorney general or public defender can hire at state expense. The Senate speaker does not propose to address that in redistricting, leaving it to be sorted out later based on judicial workload by an "unbiased, nonpartisan group."
Ramsey says Gov. Bill Haslam and House Speaker Beth Harwell are generally supportive.
Apparently, though, there is a decided lack of enthusiasm for taking on the effort. The political pluses are far outweighed by the political minuses. The issue inspires very little interest within the public at large and very intense interest among the potentially impacted judges, prosecutors and the like. They all seem content with the status quo.