Idaho

• Congressional and Legislative Process

  Primary Authority: Congressional and legislative plans are drawn and adopted by Idaho’s Citizen Commission for Reapportionment, a 6-member politically appointed body.

  • Members: The President Pro Tempore of the Idaho Senate, the Speaker of the Idaho House, the minority leaders in both chambers, and the state chairmen of the two largest political parties in Idaho each appoint 1 member. If any appointing authority fails to do so by their deadline, the Idaho Supreme Court makes the appointment. [Idaho Const. art. III, § 2; Idaho Code § 72-1502]
  • Timing: In years ending in 1 after a new federal census is available, Idaho’s Secretary of State must issue an order organizing the Commission no later than June 1. Appointments must be made within 15 days of the Secretary’s order. [Idaho Code §§ 72-1501, 72-1502]
  • Eligibility: Commissioners must be registered Idaho voters and cannot be a candidate for political office. Commissioners cannot be, nor have been in the last year, a registered lobbyist, and cannot be, nor have been in the last 2 years, an elected official or elected legislative district, county or state party officer. Commissioners are prohibited from serving in the Idaho Legislature for 5 years following their service and cannot serve on future Commissions for Reapportionment. [Idaho Const. art. III, § 2; Idaho Code §§ 72-1502, 72-1503]
  • Voting: Election of chairman and other officers requires a majority vote. Any final action by the Commission, including adoption of plans, requires a 2/3 vote. [Idaho Const. art. III, § 2; Idaho Code § 72-1505]
  • Public Input & Transparency: Commission meetings are subject to Idaho’s open meetings law and notice of meetings must be given to citizens or organizations requesting such. An unspecified number of meetings must be held in locations throughout the state to maximize the opportunity for public participation. Citizens or organizations can present redistricting plans to the Commission, which become public information. [Idaho Code § 72-1505]

  Mapping Timeline: Within 90 days of the Commission’s organization or census data becoming available, whichever is later, the Commission must file proposed legislative and congressional redistricting plans along with their final report with the Secretary of State. There is no specific deadline for final plans. Plans take effect after they are filed. [Idaho Const. art. III, § 2; Idaho Code §§ 72-1505, 72-1508]

  Redistricting Criteria:

  • Congressional: Preserve traditional neighborhoods and local communities of interest to maximum extent possible; Substantially equal in population; Avoid oddly shaped districts to maximum extent possible; Avoid divisions of counties whenever possible and minimize divisions when necessary; Contiguous; Retain local voting precinct boundaries (unless 5 commissioners vote to waive this requirement as needed to comply with other criteria).
  • Legislative: Preserve traditional neighborhoods and local communities of interest to maximum extent possible; Substantially equal in population; Avoid oddly shaped districts to maximum extent possible; Avoid divisions of counties whenever possible and minimize divisions when necessary; Contiguous; Retain local voting precinct boundaries; Districts connected by roads or highways (5 commissioners can vote to waive either of the final 2 requirements as needed to comply with other criteria).
  • PROHIBITED (both): Dividing counties to protect a party or incumbent. [Idaho Const. art. III, § 5; Idaho Code § 72-1506]

  Map Challenges: Filed in the Idaho Supreme Court. Before October 1 in years ending in 1, any registered voter or municipality can file a petition to challenge an existing legislative redistricting plan based on new federal census data OR appeal a congressional or legislative plan adopted by the Commission. [Idaho Code §§ 72-1509, 72-1510]

• Ballot Measure & Referendum Process

  Types of Measures: Direct initiatives and referendums are permitted to amend statutes. Initiatives are not permitted to amend the state constitution. Legislatively initiated ballot measures may amend both statutes and the constitution.

  Single-Subject Rule: No.

  Initiative Subject Restrictions: No.

  Signature Requirements: 20 Preliminary signatures are required for all measures. Statutory initiatives and veto referendums require 6% of the qualified electors at the time of the last general election in each of at least 18 of the state’s legislative districts, with the total number of signatures equal to at least 6% of the qualified electors statewide at the time of the last general election. At the 2022 general election in Idaho, there were 1,048,263 qualified electors, so 62,896 signatures are required for initiatives and referendums. Legislative district information can be found here.

  Submission Deadlines: Initiative petitions must be submitted to the appropriate county clerk by May 1 of the year the petition is to be on the ballot. They must also be submitted to the Secretary of State at least 4 months prior to the election in which it will appear on the ballot (July 5, 2024). Referendums must be submitted no more than 60 days after the end of the legislative session.

  Circulation Period: The circulation period for initiative petitions is 18 months. No signatures may be collected after the end of April in the year the petition is to appear on the ballot.

  Ballot Title and Summary: The ballot title and summary are written by the Attorney General and Secretary of State. Expedited reviews are permitted.

  Other Requirements: A fiscal impact statement is not required. Circulators are required to be at least 18 years old and a resident of the state. There are no supermajority requirements. Initiatives are permitted on general election ballots but not on primary, special, or odd-year election ballots.

  [Idaho Const. art. III, § 1; Idaho Code §§ 34-1801 — 34-1823; Idaho Secretary of State Website]

• Previous Redistricting Cycles

  2020

  • Congressional
    • Commission’s Original Plan
      • Adopted = November 5, 2021
      • Became Law = November 10, 2021 (Date filed with Secretary of State)
    • Litigation History
      • Pentico v. Idaho Comm'n for Reapportionment, No. 49351-2021 (Idaho Feb. 11, 2022): On December 15, 2021, an Idaho voter filed a petition with the Idaho Supreme Court challenging the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment's adopted congressional plan as violating various state statutory redistricting provisions regarding plan adoption deadlines and divisions of voting precincts. On February 11, 2022, the Idaho Supreme Court issued its ruling rejecting the petitioners' claims and upholding the congressional plan.
  • Legislative
    • Commission’s Original Plan
      • Adopted = November 5, 2021
      • Became Law = November 10, 2021 (Date filed with Secretary of State)
    • Litigation History
      • Durst v. Idaho Comm'n for Reapportionment, No. 49261-2021 (Idaho Jan. 27, 2022): On November 10, 2021, an Idaho voter filed a petition with the Idaho Supreme Court challenging the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment's adopted legislative plans as violating the Idaho Constitution’s respect for county boundaries redistricting criteria. On January 27, 2022, the Idaho Supreme Court issued its opinion upholding the commission's final legislative plan as lawful.
      • Ada County v. Idaho Comm'n for Reapportionment, No. 49267-2021 (Idaho Jan. 27, 2022): On November 17, 2021, Ada County, Idaho filed a petition with the Idaho Supreme Court challenging the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment's adopted legislative plans as violating various state constitutional and statutory redistricting provisions regarding respect for county boundaries and communities of interest. On January 27, 2022, the Idaho Supreme Court issued its opinion upholding the commission's final legislative plan as lawful.
      • Stucki v. Idaho Comm'n for Reapportionment, No. 49295-2021 (Idaho Jan. 27, 2022): On December 1, 2021, an Idaho voter filed a petition with the Idaho Supreme Court challenging the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment's adopted legislative plans as violating various constitutional and statutory redistricting provisions relating to the consideration of public feedback and respect for county boundaries, voting precincts, and communities of interest. On January 27, 2022, the Idaho Supreme Court issued its opinion upholding the commission’s deliberative process and the final legislative plan as lawful.
      • Allan v. Idaho Comm'n for Reapportionment, No. 49353-2021 (Idaho Jan. 27, 2022): On December 16, 2021, two members of Idaho Native American tribes filed a petition with the Idaho Supreme Court challenging the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment's adopted legislative plan as violating the U.S. Constitution and various Idaho redistricting statutes. They claimed the Commission’s “smallest maximum deviation as possible” goal led them to exclude state and trial interests in violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, and in doing so also violated the state’s respect for communities of interest statutory criterion. On January 27, 2022, the Idaho Supreme Court issued its opinion upholding the commission's final legislative plan and its deviation-related decisions as lawful.

  2010

  • Congressional
    • Second Commission’s Plan (Original commission failed)
      • Adopted = October 17, 2011
  • Legislative
    • Second Commission’s Original Plans (Original commission failed)
      • Adopted = October 14, 2011 (struck down by Idaho Supreme Court)
    • Remedial Plans
      • Adopted = January 27, 2012
    • Litigation History
      • In re Constitutionality of Idaho Legislative Reapportionment Plan of 2002 and of 2002 Congressional Reapportionment Plan, No. 31927-2011 (Idaho Sept. 9, 2011): The state’s Reapportionment Commission failed to file a proposed reapportionment plan with the Secretary of State by its deadline, but the Idaho Supreme Court ruled that it could not order the original commission to reconvene or extend its duration since no plan had been adopted. The court held that the Secretary of State could convene a second commission, which was formed on September 13, 2011, and the second commission adopted its congressional plans on October 17, 2011 and its legislative plans on October 14, 2011.
        • Consolidated with Frasure v. Idaho Redistricting Comm’n, No. 39128-2011 (Idaho Sept. 9, 2011).
      • Twin Falls County v. Idaho Comm’n on Redistricting, 271 P.3d 1202 (Idaho 2012): A county filed a petition challenging the commission’s adopted legislative plans on the grounds it violated the Idaho Constitution. On January 18, 2012, the Idaho Supreme Court struck down the plans on the grounds it divided more counties than necessary in violation of the state constitution and ordered the commission to adopt a new plan.
        • Remedial Plan
          • Adopted = January 27, 2012
      • Denney v. Ysursa, No. 39570-2012 (Idaho Jan. 25, 2012): The Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives and the Chairman of the Idaho Republican Party filed a petition seeking the removal and replacement of two commissioners on the second-formed commission following the Twin Falls County decision. On January 25, 2012, the Idaho Supreme Court denied the petition on the grounds the petitioners failed to demonstrate a clear right to the relief they sought.

  2000

  • Congressional
    • Commission’s Original Plan
      • Adopted = August 22, 2001
      • Filed = August 28, 2001
    • Litigation History
      • None
  • Legislative
    • Commission’s Original Plans
      • Adopted = August 22, 2001
      • Filed = August 28, 2011
    • Commission’s 1st Remedial Plans
      • Adopted = January 18, 2002
    • Commission’s 2nd Remedial Plans
      • Adopted = March 9, 2002
    • Litigation History
      • Smith v. Idaho Comm’n on Redistricting, 38 P.3d 121 (Idaho 2001): Petitioners invoked the Idaho Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to challenge the commission’s adopted legislative plans as unconstitutional for impermissibly dividing counties, separating communities of interest, having too large of population deviations, and failing to follow appropriate procedures. On November 29, 2001, the Idaho Supreme Court struck down the plans on the grounds its had unjustifiably large population deviations in violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and ordered the commission to adopt an alternative plan.
        • Consolidated with Bingham County v. Idaho Comm’n on Redistricting, No. 27811 (Idaho Nov. 29, 2001).
        • Remedial Plans
          • Adopted = January 8, 2002
      • Bingham County v. Idaho Comm’n for Reapportionment, 55 P.3d 863 (Idaho 2002): After their first plans were struck down, the commission adopted its second legislative plans on January 8, 2002, which petitioners challenged as unconstitutional. On March 1, 2002, the Idaho Supreme Court struck down the commission’s second plans on the grounds they contained unjustifiably large population deviations in violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and ordered the commission to adopt new maps.
        • Consolidated with Bilyeu v. Idaho Comm’n for Reapportionment, No. 28197 (Idaho Mar. 1, 2002).
        • Remedial Plans
          • Adopted = March 9, 2002
      • Bonneville County v. Ysursa, 129 P.3d 1213 (Idaho 2005): After the commission adopted its third legislative plans on March 9, 2002, petitioners challenged the new plans as unconstitutional on the grounds it violated the federal one person, one vote requirement and state constitutional and statutory provisions governing the redistricting process. On December 28, 2005, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants, finding the plans to be constitutional.

Current districts for Idaho by chamber, shaded by the incumbent’s party.