Legal Document

503 U.S. 442 112 S.Ct. 1415 118 L.Ed.2d 87 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, et al., Appellantsv.MONTANA, al. No. 91-860. Argued March 4, 1992. Decided 31, Syllabus Article I, § 2, of the Constitution requires apportionment Representatives among States "according to their respective Numbers." A 1941 federal statute provides that after each decennial census "the method known as equal proportions" shall be used determine number which State is entitled. Application 1990 caused Montana lose one its two seats in House Representatives. If it had retained both seats, district would have been closer ideal size a congressional than reapportioned single district. The and several officials (hereinafter Montana) sued appropriate defendants Government) District Court, alleging, inter alia, existing violates 2. three-judge court, convened pursuant 28 U.S.C. 2284, granted summary judgment on this claim, holding unconstitutional because variance between district's population could not justified under "one-person, one-vote" standard developed Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 1, 84 526, 11 481, other intrastate districting cases. Held: Congress exercised authority within limits dictated by Constitution. Pp. 447-466. (a) general admonition made [the States'] numbers" constrained three constitutional requirements: exceed for every 30,000 persons; at least Representative; boundaries may cross state lines. In light those constraints problem fractional remainders—i.e., portion results when State's total divided must either disregarded or treated Representative represented whole legislators—Congress has considered rejected adopted various methods over years, most recent tried being proportions, also "Hill Method." National Academy Sciences committee recommended fairest five felt lead workable solution remainder problem. chosen harmonic mean, "Dean Method," received second seat census. 447-456. (b) This Court rejects Government's argument Congress' selection any alternative presents "political question" subject judicial review standards set forth Baker Carr, 369 186, 217, 82 691, 710, 7 663. Significantly, Government does suggest all decisions relating are beyond review, but merely argues erred concluding greatest possible equality districts, measured absolute deviation from size. Thus, controversy here turns proper interpretation relevant provisions. As itself cases followed, political question doctrine place kind outside domain Judiciary. 456-459. (c) ample power enact statutory procedure issue apply Hill Method It no means clear facts establish violation one-person, one-vote standard. Although Montana's evidence demonstrated application Dean decrease size, increase relative difference districts Washington, only lost Method. Wesberry's polestar representation provide sufficient guidance what better measure inequality. Moreover, while subsequent interpreted imposing burden make good-faith effort achieve precise mathematical equality, goal rendered illusory Nation imposed 2: guarantee minimum representative need allocate fixed indivisible 50 varying populations. framework generated compromise interests larger smaller delegate discretion broader accorded States, apparently decision adopt commands far more deference, particularly was decades experience, experimentation, debate, supported independent scholars, accepted half century. 459-466. 775 F.Supp. 1358, (D.Mont.1991), reversed. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Kenneth W. Starr, D.C., appellants. Marc Racicot, Helena, Mont., appellees. Justice STEVENS 1 Numbers."1 An Act passed entitled.2 case held found proportions resulted an unjustified representation.3 appeal us consider governs States. view importance significance year's Presidential elections, we noted probable jurisdiction ordered expedited briefing argument. 502 ----, 656, 116 747 (1991). We now reverse. 2 * revealed certain California, Florida, Texas, increased rapidly national average. 8 gain 19 additional Representatives4 13 number.5 Its loss cut delegation precipitated litigation. 3 According census, elect members 249,022,783.6 average 435 572,466. 803,655 forms 231,189 persons 170,638 terms difference, 4 Montana, Governor, Attorney General, Secretary State,7 Senators collectively referred filed suit against (the United asserting entitled retain seats. They alleged "does individuals per representative"8 7, reapportionment effected "through formula Department Commerce automatic transmittal states"9 rather legislation Members vote normal manner. motion first claim.10 5 majority decided principle numbers people applied 481 (1964), should Under variances acceptable "are unavoidable despite justification shown," Kirkpatrick Preisler, 394 531, 89 1225, 1229, 22 519 (1969). refused accord deference without benefit Court's later jurisprudence adopting rule. Accordingly, entered declaring void enjoining effecting proportions.11 6 Circuit Judge O'Scannlain dissented. After noting four different formulas during country's history, create located entirely State, he concluded " 'practical approximation' population-based allocation.12 He analyzed formulae proposed failed demonstrate Congress.13 II apportioned Numbers" requirements. lines.14 text I determined original Framers agreed upon,15 did explain how specific allocation made. When confronted task 1790 (and Vermont Kentucky admitted Union), using Dividing into 3,615,920 indicated contain 120 members. individual quotient with remainder. use divisor Connecticut's 236,841 7.89 Representatives, Rhode Island, 68,446, 2.28 Because legislators, necessary disregard remainders treat some them Representative.16 9 bill Congress, assigned nine whose quotas highest remainders. quota gave Island's disregarded, giving Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson persuaded President Washington veto bill, part eight Connecticut exceeded limit persons.17 10 response veto, proposal sponsored (thus Representatives). To overcome basis reduced 105 members, approximate constituency 33,000 instead persons. increased,18 Jefferson's disregarding next censuses. Today mathematicians sometimes refer "method divisors," tends favor large States.19 1832, considered, adopt, John Quincy Adams exact opposite method. Instead remainders, fraction unit. former example hypothetical, Island they actually described smallest divisors" said States.20 never endorsed Congress. 12 1842, abandoned approach Senator Daniel Webster. Webster took account were greater one-half allocating "one having moiety."21 if 1790, whereas 2.28, major fractions." 1850, enacted Vinton endorsing Hamilton census.22 balance 19th century, occasionally seemed produce paradoxical results.23 1911, reverting year ultimately 435.24 14 1920 pass Act, debates led request appoint experts subject. That committee, composed respected mathematicians, adoption proportions." 1930 formally case.25 15 report properly Hamilton/Vinton method, problem.26 given fact impossible same best minimized discrepancy pair test fairness, satisfactory if, transfer States' districts.27 choice depended sizes. Each "best" sense minimizing depending selected. example, yielded Representative. fractions person (also person's "share" Representative28). produced "relative difference"29 share Representative.30 16 proportions. preferred reasons. First, person. Second, comparison occupied intermediate position favoring small States: favored divisors, much divisors mean.31 17 seat. used, stronger claims claim 441st "priority list," see n. 26, supra.32 divisors. III 18 involved litigation review. Relying principally 663 (1962), contends these amenable resolution. extensive our prior involving questions, concluded: 20 "It apparent formulations vary slightly according settings questions arise describe question, although elements identify essentially function separation powers. Prominent surface involve textually demonstrable commitment coordinate department; lack judicially discoverable manageable resolving it; impossibility deciding initial policy determination clearly nonjudicial discretion; court's undertaking resolution expressing respect due branches government; unusual unquestioning adherence already made; potentiality embarrassment multifarious pronouncements departments question. 21 "Unless inextricable bar, there dismissal non-justiciability ground question's presence. 'political questions,' cases.' courts cannot reject 'no law suit' bona fide whether action denominated 'political' exceeds authority." Id., S.Ct., 710. insists factors identified supports conclusion presented committed branches" exclusion however, not, instance, dispute court aside plan violated requirement "[t]he thirty Thousand."33 Further, provision "shall . Numbers,"34 acknowledges enforceable obligation select related population.35 gravamen imposes rigorous then contention places substantive limitations violations present justiciable controversy. Where parties differ understanding content limitations. short, takes existence right, definition such right. 23 concludes nonjusticiable declines address merits issue. See Gilligan Morgan, 413 10-12, 93 2440, 2445-2447, 37 407 (1973); U.S., 197, 699; Colegrove Green, 328 549, 552-556, 66 1198, 1199-1201, 90 L.Ed. 1432 (1946) (plurality opinion). invoking doctrine, possibility enforceable.36 Such course very determining violate Constitution.37 reflects exercise abstention true 24 before today "political" Carr case." raises great branches.38 motivated partisan sectional debate important portions history. Nevertheless, reasons justiciability challenges legislative well election see, e.g., (1964); Karcher Daggett, 462 725, 103 2653, 77 133 (1983), force issues previous rejection context clear, provisions competence Davis Bandemer, 478 109, 123, 106 2797, 2805, 92 85 (1986); 234-237, 719-721; cf. 11, 2446. bar reaching correctly construed 25 Our concerned creating districts; actions Respect branch special concerns cases, relate resolve it. raised otherwise unquestionably jurisdiction, INS Chadha, 919, 940-941, 2764, 2778-2779, 317 (1983); Powell McCormack, 395 486, 521, 1944, 1964, 491 Without another exploration factors, suffices say that, IV 26 voters Fulton County, Georgia, disparity (823,680) ten Georgia (394,312) deprived right "to votes Congressmen weight Georgians." 3, 527. upheld established "high justice common sense" districts: "equal people." 18, 535. command "by People States" meant "as nearly practicable man's worth another's." 7-8, 529-530. Writing Black explained: 27 defeat solemnly embodied Great Compromise—equal people—for hold legislatures draw lines way give voice choosing Congressman others. Convention agreed, represent individuals, complete voter." 14, 533. "make equality." 530-531, 1228-1229, (1969); 730, 2658. 29 applying disparities voting State. case, contends, applies 30 mean (sometimes method") called apportion 48 less—eight nine—and more. undertaken (803,655) (572,466) 231,189; (543,105) 29,361. Hence, sum differences 260,550. 401,838, representing 170,638; averaging 610,993, 38,527 deviations thus 209,165 (harmonic mean), 260,550 (equal proportions). More generally, emphasizes 31 There historical insights informed construction well. require pursue representation, might find embody equality. Yet changes parallel differences. Within theoretical incompatibility entailed contrast, reduction effect increasing difference39 Washington.40 reductions bring affected ideal, change pushes away ideal.41 32 What inequality—absolute Representative, share? Neither analysis nor conclusive answer. none measures inequality do commanding significance. allow discern constitutionally permissible course. 33 compliance begins voter. percent demonstrate, realistic decisions. 730-743, 2658-2665. two, will 40 percent. 34 inexorably compels significant departure ideal. Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming, where statewide less populous district, valuable populations makes virtually let alone 50. "common requiring "a equality" whole. 35 commonsense characteristic Federal obvious masters who framed spirit provided specified itself. Today, then, fair entire country. 36 process easier sizes borders. 8, cl. expressly authorizes proper" carry out delegated responsibilities. capable reviewed relatively rigid standard.42 suggested character43 inconsistent responsibility fresh census.44 merit suggestion. Indeed, constitutional, seems administered efficiently avoids legitimacy action, undermining extent potentially divisive complex associated can narrowed procedural rules consistently year, public served, provided, course, rule remains open challenge time. obstacle preventing sensible procedure. 38 about substance requirement. Independent scholars basic regular followed particular proportions.45 For century Nation. history 39 so ordered. originally "Representatives Numbers, adding Number free Persons, including bound Service Term Years, excluding Indians taxed, fifths Persons." Section Fourteenth Amendment modified establishing numbers, counting taxed." 55 Stat. 761-762; 2a(a). 1366 (Mont.1991). Three accounted gains; Arizona, North Carolina, Virginia, gained App. 20. New York seats; Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Jersey, West Virginia Ibid. ibid. brought behalf Montana. Complaint ¶ 19. &Par; 28-29. Having unnecessary reach apportionment. F.Supp., 1366. 1369 (quoting J. Story, Commentaries 676 (1833)). mean" yield fairer result. Subsequent below, Massachusetts litigation, plaintiffs asserted superiority "major fractions," unconstitutional. Mosbacher, Civ.Action 91-11234-WD, --- ---- (Mass., Feb. 20, 1992). requirements explicitly borders appears implicit recognized continuous practice. 1365, 4; id., 1368 (O'Scannlain, dissenting). required enumeration years meeting "until made, Hampshire choose three, eight, Rhode-Island Providence Plantations one, five, New-York six, Jersey four, Delaware Maryland ten, Carolina South three." M. Balinski & H. Young, Fair Representation, Meeting Ideal One Man, Vote 10-13 (1982) Young). 16-22. Washington's message read follows: "Gentlemen Representatives: "I maturely act Houses 'An Apportionment Enumeration;' return your House, wherein originated, following objections: "First. prescribed numbers; proportion which, allotment bill. "Second. thousand; restriction is, context, construction, separate States; allotted thousand, "G. Washington" Annals Cong. 539 (1792). 1802 continued ratio 33,000, corresponded 141 Members. Jan. 1802, 128. third 35,000, 181 Dec. 21, 1811, 669. 1822 40,000 213. Mar. 1822, 651. 1832 240 47,700 each. May 22, 516. generally L. Schmeckebier, Congressional 111-113 (1941). Young 73-75. June 25, 491. 23, §§ 24-26, 432-433. Nation's (set 233 1850) quota. receive corresponding (ignoring remainders). remaining nationwide (233 distributed largest practice, strictly followed. 37; Chafee, Reapportionment, 42 Harv.L.Rev. 1015, 1025 (1929). "Alabama paradox," phenomenon increased. 38-40; Harv.L.Rev., 1026. 1911 433 authorized Arizona Mexico Union. 13. Additional Alaska Hawaii Union 1959, thereafter reverted 435, remained ever since. 72 345; 73 8. Nov. 15, 1941, 761-762, 2a. self-executing, eliminating census: "(a) On day, week thereafter, session Eighty-second fifth transmit statement showing ascertained seventeenth population, Member. "(b) duty Clerk fifteen calendar days receipt statement, send executive certificate section." mean," proportions," divisors." 17. corresponds producing list." priority list mechanical modern apportionments translate assignment technical forming proceeds follows. satisfy guarantee. tabulated series Third, quotients arranged order beginning quotient, 51st Member House. list. methods. 1029, 39. ("n" seat): Smallest Divisors: n - 2(n-1)n Harmonic Mean: -------- (n-1)+n Equal Proportions: \/ n(n-1) Major Fractions: 1/2 Greatest second, third, fourth, x , _____ 2x1, 3x2, 4x3, 5x4 3/2, 5/2, 7/2, 9/2 California York. 29,839,250, 18,044,505. are: (divisor: (divisor; -1 = 29,839,250 14,919,625 18,044,505 9,022,252 53. 9,946,317 6,014,835 employed, 52nd 9,946,417, higher York's seat, 9,022,252. explained "Let selected a, B b A/a, B/b equal, a/A, b/B, practice desirable result pairs "In following: "An fixed, mathematically A/a decreased assigning fewer B, vice versa, a/A b/B property." 18. reciprocal 1/572,466 "The consists subtracting dividing number." (Ernst Declaration). attempt bias. Some terms, favors inherent bias 72-78. disputed. 1992), p. 57. 35. Const., Art. 3. Brief 24-34; Tr. Oral Arg. 10-13. Henkin, Is "Political Question" Doctrine?, Yale L.J. 597, 599 (1976). Redish, Courts Political Order 116-117 Not composition implicated electoral college elects President. includes equivalent II, 29, supra. proportions), respectively, 40.4% 5.4%; mean) 42.5% 6.7%. 27. actual (Montana Representatives) Absolute Relative Average Difference Size From 543,105 29,361 5.4% Total 401,828 610,993 6.7% apportionment; 41 argued represents similar his dissent potential taking 1371. suggests influenced 1941. Arkansas, Democratic Republican leanings. along party (except Democrats opposed bill). 57-58; 1365. periodically since altered choice. pp. 40-42. contend systematically party, retention 50-year period efforts maintain advantage. 43 44 45 article written 1929, Zechariah Jr., wrote: "[B]oth point Proportions just president high official, definitely indicated. permanent known, operate many constant demands revision. longer engage prolonged hearings years. Reapportionment taken politics." 1047.

Classification Label: 1