CROWD ACADEMY: Georgia Chapter 5.

State Law Governing Redistricting: Georgia

What State Laws Apply to

Congressional Redistricting?
While the reapportionment of legislative districts is a matter primarily
reserved to the respective states,1 federal law supplies most of the principles
for congressional redistricting. However, there are a few state law principles
that are still important for congressional redistricting. Congress capped the
U.S. House of Representatives to 435 seats in 1929, with each State getting
at least one and the rest apportioned based on population. The impact of
gained or lost seat(s) on the electoral process is determined by state law.
Under Georgia law, the General Assembly is required to divide the state
into 14 congressional districts that comply with federal law.2 The Georgia
General Assembly has a joint standing committee that aids in the redistricting
process, the Committee on Reapportionment & Redistricting.3 Since a
legislative act is required to approve new districts, the Governor has veto
power over the maps, but the House and Senate can override the Governor’s
veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers.4

Congressional redistricting is extremely important for Georgia communities.

In Miller v. Johnson, Georgia’s 11th Congressional District was struck down as
an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.5 In an attempt to create a majority
minority district, lawmakers drew the old 11th District to stretch from Atlanta
to Savannah, a distance of 260 miles.6 The district was similar to the “I-85
12th District” in North Carolina, which stretched over 150 miles from Durham
to Charlotte, and which was also found to be an unconstitutional racial
gerrymander. 7 The court determined that race was the predominant factor
in creating the 11th District, stating that the cultures of Atlanta and Savannah
were “worlds apart” and that “the social, political and economic makeup of
the Eleventh District tells a tale of disparity, not community.”8

1
 Georgia
1
 rowe v. Emison, 507 U.S.
G
25, 34 (1993).
2
See Ga. Stat. Ann. § 21-1-
2; U.S. Const. Art. 2, § 2
3
 ttp://www.senate.
h
ga.gov/committees/
en-US/committee.aspx?-
Committee=140
4
 a. Const. Art. III, § 5, ¶¶
G
XI, XIII(d)
5
See 515 U.S. 900, 908,
913 (1995) (“Shape is
relevant not because
bizarreness is a nec-
essary element of the
constitutional wrong or
a threshold requirement
of proof, but because
it may be persuasive
circumstantial evidence
that race for its own
sake, and not other dis-
tricting principles, was
the legislature’s dom-
inant and controlling
rationale in drawing its
district lines.”)
6
Id.
7
 haw v. Hunt, 517 U.S.
S
899 (1996)
8
Id.; see also Charles S.
Bullock III, The History of
Redistricting in Georgia,
Georgia Law Review,
Vol. 52:1057, 1086
(November 6, 2018)
(explaining that the
13th Congressional
District (added after
the 2000 Census) was
known “dead cat on the
expressway” district be-
cause of its reach across
county lines, etc. It has
since been redrawn.)
 CROWD ACADEMY: Georgia Chapter 5. State Law Governing Redistricting: Georgia

What State Laws Apply to State

Legislative Redistricting?
The foundational structure and principles of a given State’s government can  avid Daley, How
D
9

Gerrymandering Leads to
Radical Abortion Laws,
be found in its Constitution, while the state’s statutory laws lay out additional The New Republic (May
14, 2019), available at
https://newrepublic.com/
rules. In recent years, some states have sought to alter their electoral pro- article/153901/gerry-
mandering-leads-rad-
cesses by adding amendments to the state’s constitution. The new voter ID ical-abortion-laws
(“When a state is
ruthlessly districted,
requirement in North Carolina — the subject of intense litigation and public voters are robbed of
meaningful elections
debate — offers a broadly familiar example of such an effort. When a new and … unrepresentative
policies become law.”)

constitutional amendment is enacted, it often requires more specific rules in 10

 a. Const. Art. III, §
G
2, ¶ 1

the way of statutory law to govern its implementation. We call this enabling 11
 ttp://www.senate.
h
ga.gov/senators/en-US/
SenateMembersList.
legislation. Given the long-standing popularity among states of creating new aspx; http://www.house.
ga.gov/Representatives/
rules and regulations to manipulate the electoral process, it is important for en-US/HouseMember-
sList.aspx; see also Ga.
Code Ann. § 28-2-1 (1981)
communities to be familiar with how such rules can be proposed, implement- (“There shall be 180
members of the House
of Representatives),
ed, and challenged, as well as the roles of the legislature, citizens, and other Ga. Code Ann. § 28-2-2
(1981) (“There shall be 56
key figures in their state’s rulemaking processes.9 members of the Senate”)
12
 a. Const. Art. III, §
G
II, ¶ II; see also Blum v.
Schrader, 637 S.E.2d 396
Under the Georgia Constitution, there must be no more than 56 senators (Ga. 2006) (“The fre-
quency of reapportion-
ment between censuses
and at least 180 representatives apportioned among representative districts is solely a matter of
unfettered legislative
throughout the state.10 There are currently 56 senators and 180 representa- discretion, unrestricted
by any state constitu-
tional prohibition.”)
tives.11 The General Assembly has the authority to apportion the Senate and 13
Ga. Code Ann. § 28-2-1

House districts as necessary after each decennial census, but the districts Ga. Code Ann. § 28-2-2
14

must be contiguous.12 The General Assembly must divide the state into “180
representative districts which shall consist of either a portion of a county or a
county or counties or any combination thereof[.]”13 Redistricting of the Geor-
gia Senate must comply with the same standard.14 There is no explicit state
statutory or constitutional duty for the Georgia General Assembly to redistrict
in compliance with the “one person-one vote” federal constitutional standard,

3
but the General Assembly must still comply with federal law.15 Additionally, as  arios v. Cox, 314 F.
L
15

Supp. 2d 1320, 1337 (N.D.

Ga. 2004), aff’d Cox v.
stated above, the Governor has veto power over any redistricting act passed Larios, 542 U.S. 947 (“[T]
he central and invari-
able objective in [legis-
by the General Assembly, subject to a veto override by two-thirds majority of lative and congressional
reapportionment] is
both the House and Senate.16 ‘equal representation
for equal numbers
of people.’” (quoting
Wesberry v. Sanders, 376
U.S. 1, 18 (1964)))
In Larios v. Cox, a federal court addressed Georgia’s Senate, House, and con- 16
 a. Const. Art. III, § 5,
G
¶ XIII(d)
gressional reapportionment plans, and set out a guiding principle for future 17
 14 F. Supp. 2d at 1338
3
(citing Roman v. Sincock,
redistricting “where population deviations are not supported by such legiti- 377 U.S. 695, 710 (1964)).
18
 62 U.S. 835, 842 (1983)
4
mate interests but, rather, are tainted by arbitrariness or discrimination, they (internal citation and
quotation omitted)
cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny.”17 In Brown v. Thomson, the Supreme 19
Larios, 314 F. Supp. 2d
at 1341 (quoting Roman,
Court explicitly held that “minor deviations from mathematical equality 377 U.S. at 710).

among state legislative districts are insufficient to make out a prima facie
case of invidious discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment so as to
require justification by the State. Our decisions have established, as a general
matter, that an apportionment plan with a maximum population deviation
under 10% falls within this category of minor deviations.”18 However, the redis-
tricting plans must still be free from the “taint of arbitrariness or discrimina-
tion.”19 Judicial decisions such as Brown serve as case law or precedent which
has the binding effect of law, whereas cases such as Larios serve as persua-
sive authority because they were not decided at the United States Supreme
Court or Georgia Supreme Court.
 CROWD ACADEMY: Georgia Chapter 5. State Law Governing Redistricting: Georgia

be heard
5
What State Laws Apply to Local
Redistricting?
Local Electoral Districts
In addition to United States Congressional Districts and state legislative dis-
tricts, each state consists of local electoral districts or territorial s­ ubdivisions
for electing local public officials to legislative bodies, such as the school
board or town council. These districts are referred to by a variety of different
The Georgia
names depending on the jurisdiction — i.e. election districts, wards, or pre-
General
cincts. The Census Bureau has adopted the term VTD (voting district) as the Assembly also
generic term it uses to refer to the wide variety of polling areas that state and has the power
local governments create for the purposes of administering ­elections. to enact a
“local law”
After the decennial census is taken, “the governing authority of any mu- which allows it
nicipal corporation is authorized to reapportion the election districts from to reapportion
which members of the municipal governing authority are elected[.]”20 The the districts
districts must be contiguous, must comply with federal one person-one vote within a
requirements, and must be “limited to adjusting the boundary lines of the municipality
existing districts only to the extent reasonably necessary to comply with at any time.
[the one-person one-vote standard][.]”21 The Georgia General Assembly
also has the power to enact a “local law,” which allows it to reapportion the
districts within a municipality at any time.22 Local laws can nullify a munic-  a. Code Ann. § 36-35-
G
20

4.1(a) (1981)

ipality’s apportionment power if they are passed before the first municipal Id. at (b)
21

22
Id. at (d)
election after the decennial census.23 Furthermore, in municipalities with a 23
Id. (it is quite possible
that if a local law
population of 40,000 or more, districts can only be reapportioned one time is passed after the
municipality has
already reapportioned
after the initial census reapportionment during the ten-year period between the districts, the local
law takes precedence,
censuses, provided that “(1) no such reapportionment shall result in the based on the interpre-
tation of the statute).

redistricting of more than 600 persons, (2) no such reapportionment shall Id. at (e). This law was
24

passed while Georgia

was still under VRA pre-
occur within 180 days of a general or special municipal election or primary, clearance (which was
essentially overturned
in Shelby County v.
and (3) a map reflecting any changes and copies of any communications to Holder), explaining the
reference to the United
or from the United States Department of Justice relating to such changes States Department of
Justice in part 3.

are furnished to the Secretary of State and the Legislative Reapportionment

Office within 30 days after such change or communication.”24
 CROWD ACADEMY: Georgia Chapter 5. State Law Governing Redistricting: Georgia

As to another local governing body, in counties where a “homestead option

sales and use tax” is being collected, and the respective county board of
education has more than seven members, “such county boards of education
shall consist of seven members elected from separate single-member districts 25
 .C.G.A. § 20-2-52.1
O
(2014)
of approximately equal population.”25 Other county boards of education with 26
 .C.G.A. § 20-2-51
O
(2015) (a person seeking
to be elected for the
smaller boards are also elected through a district system.26 school board shall be a
resident of the election
district which such per-
son seeks to represent)
The importance of redistricting was made clear in Sumter County, Georgia 27
 ark Niesse, Voting
M
Rights Tested in Georgia
where “[a] state law redrew school [electoral] district boundaries in 2014, flip- County Where Blacks
Quickly Lost Power, The
Atlanta Journal-Con-
ping the 6-3 black majority to a 2-5 minority[.]”27 In 2010, two extra at-large stitution (October
10, 2019), available
at https://www.ajc.
districts were created in addition to the already-constituted five single-mem- com/news/state--re-
gional-govt--politics/
ber districts, which the Georgia General Assembly ratified both in 2011 and voting-rights-test-
ed-georgia-coun-
ty-where-blacks-
2014 (despite a new school board seeking to undo the at-large districts).28 quickly-lost-power/
iwjrHhYWfkZsPHWN1x-
Sumter County School Board elections have been cancelled since 2016 pend- o34M/
28
Id.
ing litigation, in which a federal court struck down the current school board 29
Id.; Wright v. Sumter
County Bd. Of Elections &
district election infrastructure pending a special master’s new district map.29 Registration, 361 F. Supp.
3d 1296 (M.D. Ga. 2018)

As a result, four of the current school board members have expired terms, 30
Id.
31
Id.
with no one to replace them.30 Additionally, as the plaintiff in the case Mathis
Kearse Wright stated, the outcome of this case is important to African-Ameri-
can students because they “deserve representatives from their community.”