Opinion ID: 770944
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Montana's 1992 Redistricting Plan

Text: 6 Since 1972, Montana's Constitution has granted the exclusive power to adopt a redistricting plan to a five-member Districting and Apportionment Commission. Although the Montana legislature can make recommendations to the Commission, it has no direct power over the geographic composition of legislative districts. The Commission itself is reconstituted every ten years in advance of the federal census. Commission members may not be public officials, although four of the five are appointed by majority and minority leaders of each house of the state legislature. The four Commission members select the fifth member. 7 The federal census in 1990 revealed that population changes in Montana between 1980 and 1990 had caused some legislative districts in Montana to become malapportioned, and potentially violative of the one-person one-vote requirement embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment. The 1992 Districting and Apportionment Commission therefore was required to draw a new redistricting plan. None of the five Commission members selected was an American Indian. 8 The Commission held twelve regional public hearings beginning on April 3, 1992. Nine of these regional hearings were preceded by planning meetings that were open to the public. All of these hearings and meetings were recorded on audio tape; portions of these tapes were summarized or transcribed in the official minutes of the Commission. Statements made by Commissioners at these hearings and meetings form the basis for plaintiffs' claim that Commission members acted with a discriminatory purpose. American Indians appearing before the Commission presented alternative districting plans. One of these plans, referred to as the Blackfeet-Flathead Plan, contained an alternative districting proposal for the four challenged House districts that are the subject of this appeal. 9 After submitting its redistricting plan to the legislature for comment, the Commission filed its statewide redistricting plan with the Secretary of State on February 24, 1993. The plan (which we, like the district court, will continue to refer to as the 1992 redistricting plan) then became law, and the Commission dissolved. 10 The 1992 redistricting plan increased the number of majority-Indian House Districts (HDs) from four to five (i.e., HDs 5, 6, 85, 92, and 98). See Appendix I (1994 Montana Legislative Districts appearing in Appellee's Supplemental Excerpts of Record [at 20]). One of these majorityIndian districts, House District 85, is included in the four districts challenged on appeal. House District 85 contains the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Glacier County. Of the five majority-Indian districts in the state plan, HD 85 has by far the largest Indian voting age population: 66% for HD 85, as opposed to 55% in HD 98, 53% in HD 6, 52% in HD 92, and 50% in HD 5. 11 Table 1 House Districts by Percentage Indian Voting Age Population (VAP) ( indicates district lines are challenged on appeal) House District Percentage Indian VAP HD 85 66% HD 98 55% HD 6 53% HD 92 52% HD 5 50% HD 73 28% HD 86 19% HD 74 14% All others less than 11% 12 Of the remaining House Districts in the state, only three have an Indian voting age population of 11% or more: 28% in HD 73, 19% in HD 86, and 14% in HD 74. These three districts, HDs 73, 86 and 74, are the remaining three House Districts whose boundaries are challenged on appeal. 13 The 1992 redistricting plan contains one majority-Indian Senate District (SD). That district, SD 3, is located in the southeast portion of the state, and contains an Indian voting age population of 51%. SD 3 is not a subject of this appeal.