Court Opinion

ID: 9701655
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 22:29:28.00917+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:26.895002
License: Public Domain

VERNIERO, ALBIN, JJ.,
dissenting.
Pursuant to Article IV, section 2 of the New Jersey Constitution, Newark and Jersey City can be divided into no more than two State legislative districts each. The majority declares that following that constitutional mandate would violate the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) and, on that basis, upholds the current legislative apportionment map. We cannot determine whether the majority’s position is correct based on the present record. We thus would remand this matter to the Law Division, giving the current map a presumption of validity. We would allow the challengers the opportunity to demonstrate, with substantial certainty, whether an alternative apportionment plan can pass muster under federal law consistent with the New Jersey Constitution.
*401We do not accept the majority’s conclusion that past departures from Article IV, section 2, paragraph 3 effectively have written that provision out of the State’s constitution. The cases that arguably support the Court’s holding were decided under circumstances not present here. Accordingly, we would not import the rationale of those decisions to this ease. Simply put, Article IV, section 2 of our State’s constitution remains in effect and need only yield to superior federal voting-rights principles. The recently-decided Georgia v. Ashcroft, — U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 2498, 156 L.Ed.2d 428 (2003), addresses a section of the VRA that is not implicated in this case. Accordingly, Ashcroft does not resolve the issues before us.
Contrary to the Appellate Division, we also are not prepared at this juncture to hold that Article IV, section 2 invalidates the Commission’s 2001 plan, which otherwise is presumed valid. Davenport v. Apportionment Comm’n, 65 N.J. 125, 135, 319 A.2d 718, 723 (1974). Neither the Commission nor the Law Division explicitly tested the notion whether Newark and Jersey City can be divided into two districts each consistent with federal law. In sum, we cannot determine the validity of the 2001 apportionment plan on the present record. We respectfully dissent.