Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-1314_3ea4.pdf
Page Number: 1

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2014 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued.
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE v. ARIZONA 
INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION ET AL. 

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

No. 13–1314.  Argued March 2, 2015—Decided June 29, 2015 

Under Arizona’s Constitution, the electorate shares lawmaking author-
ity  on  equal  footing  with  the  Arizona  Legislature.    The  voters  may
adopt  laws  and  constitutional  amendments  by  ballot  initiative,  and
they may approve or disapprove, by referendum, measures passed by
the Legislature.  Ariz. Const., Art. IV, pt. 1, §1.  “Any law which may 
be enacted by the Legislature . . . may be enacted by the people under 
the Initiative.”  Art. XXII, §14. 

In  2000,  Arizona  voters  adopted  Proposition  106,  an  initiative 
aimed  at  the  problem  of  gerrymandering.    Proposition  106  amended 
Arizona’s Constitution, removing redistricting authority from the Ar-
izona  Legislature  and  vesting  it  in  an  independent  commission,  the
Arizona  Independent  Redistricting  Commission  (AIRC).    After  the 
2010 census, as after the 2000 census, the AIRC adopted redistricting
maps for congressional as well as state legislative districts.  The Ari-
zona  Legislature  challenged  the  map  the  Commission  adopted  in 
2012  for  congressional  districts,  arguing  that  the  AIRC  and  its  map
violated  the  “Elections  Clause”  of  the  U. S.  Constitution,  which  pro-
vides: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Sena-
tors  and  Representatives  shall  be  prescribed  in  each  State  by  the
Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make
or alter such Regulations.”  Because “Legislature” means the State’s 
representative  assembly,  the  Arizona  Legislature  contended,  the
Clause precludes resort to an independent commission, created by in-
itiative,  to  accomplish  redistricting.    A  three-judge  District  Court 
held  that  the  Arizona  Legislature  had  standing  to  sue,  but  rejected
its complaint on the merits. 

Held: