May 7, 1957

Honorable Crawford C. Martin, Chairman, Senate Committee on Legislative, Congressional and Judicial Districts, Capitol Station, .Austin, Texas Opinion No. WW-118.
Re: Validity of**House** Bill 229 Dear Senator Martin: of the 55th Legislature.

You have requested our opinion on the validity ofHouse Bill 229 of the 55th Legislature. You stated inyour request:

“I am sending you acopy of**House** Bill 229 with Committee Amendment #l. You will note that Committee Amendment #l seeks to provide that the two Congressmen from Harris County will be elected at large from the eighth and twenty-second Congressional Districts, which districts shall compose Harris county. “A question has been raised as towhether or not it is necessary that the county be divided into two Congressional Districts or can itbe done inthis fashion. “We would appreciate your advising as to whether or not acongressional redistricting bill authorizing two Congressmen from Harrts County, both to be elected at large over the County, violates any provision of the Federal or State Constitution or Statutes. “This same question is relevant inreference to Senate Bill 69which is currently pending inthe Committee.

“We would appreciate your advice onthis subject at the earliest possible time.”Honorable Crawford C. Martin, Page 2 (WW-118)

House Bill 229 is abill to apportion the State of Texas into congressional districts and provide for the election of a member ofthe Congress ofthe United States from each district. The bill contains only one subject, and the caption properly informs members of the Legislature and everyone concerned with House Bill 229 ofthe matters contained inthe body ofthe bill. Therefore, there is no constitutional objection to the form ofHouse Bill 229.

Under the provisions ofHouse Bill 229 as amended by the adoption ofCommittee Amendment No. 1,the Eighth and Twentysecond Congressional Districts will be composed ofHarris County ifthe provisions ofHouse Bill 229 are enacted into law.

Section 2 ofthe 14th Amendment to the Constitution ofthe United States provides in part: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers.

. ,‘I While Congress at one time required states to apportion its congressional districts into contiguous and compact territories containing as nearly as practical, an equal number of inhabitants f2 U.S.C.A., 83, 37 Stat. 14- Smiley v. Helm, 285 U.S. 355, (1932); Wood v. Bloom, 287 U.S. 1, (1932); Watts v. O’Connell, 247 S.W. 2d 531 (Kentucky, 195217, Congress has now provided: “Until aState is redistricted inthe manner provided by the law thereof after any apportionment, the Representatives towhich such State is entitled under such apportionment shall be elected inthe following manner: (1) Ifthere is no change inthe number ofRepresentatives, they shall be elected from the districts then prescribed by the law of such State, and ifany ofthem are elected from the State at large they shall continue to be so elected; (2) if there is an increase inthe number ofRepresentatives, such additional Representative or Representatives shall be elerted from the State at large and the other Representatives from the districts then prescribed by the law of such State; (3) ifthere is adecrease in the number ofRepresentatives but the number of districts in such State is equal to such decreased number ofRepresentatives, they shall be elected from the districts then prescribed by the law of such State; (4) ifthere is adecrease inthe number of Representatives but the number ofdistricts in suchHonorable Crawford C. Martin, Page 3 (WW-118).

State is less than ,such number ofRepre~sentatives, the number ofRepresentatives by which such number of districts is exceeded shall be elected from the State at large and the other Representatives from the districts then prescribed by the law of such State; or (5) ifthere is adecrease inthe number ofRepresentatives and the number ofdistricts in such State I exceeds such decreased number ofRepresentatives,

they shall be elected from the State at large.” 2U.S.C.A. g2a, subdivision (c). Under the Federal Constitution and Acts of Congress, it is left upto the individual states to redistrict the state into congressional districts, and Congress has provided that additional Representatives allocated to the state under congressional reapportionment must be elected by the state at large until anew districting statute dividing the state into anumber ofcongresstonal districts allocated by the reapportionment has been enacted by the state. Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U.S. 375, (1932). We know ofno provision, either inthe State ;or Federal Constitutions or Acts of Congress which requires congressional districts to be composed ofcontiguous territories contatning an equal number of inhabitants. Therefore, it is our opinion that the Legislature has the power to provide that Harris County sh,all elect two members of Congress rather than dividing Harris County by metes and bounds into two congressional districts.

Inview ofthe foregoing, itts,our opinion that the provisions ofHouse Bill 229, ofthe 55th Legislature as submitted are constitutional and valtd.

However, we should point out that Congress is the judge of its own membership, andwe are informed that there has not been an arrangement resembling this type of apportionment of a state into congressional districts for over one hundred years. Therefore, this method may be questioned in Congress.

SUMMARY

The provisions ofHouse Bill 229 ofthe 55th Legislature, redistricting the State into congressional dtstricts whereinthe’eighth and.

.. .

Honorable Crawford C. Martin, Page 4 (WW-118).

twenty-second congressional districts will be composed ofHarris County ifenacted into law, is constitutional as su,bmitted.

Yours very truly,
WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas ’

Assistant JR:pf APPROVED:
OPINION COMMIT TEE
H. Grady Chandler, Chairman
J. C. Davis, Jr.
Jas. H. ‘Rogers REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: Gao. P. Blackburn