Case Summary

In 1972, a three-judge federal district court panel struck down North Dakota’s legislative redistricting plan and implemented an interim remedial plan that had a 20% population variance amongst state Senate districts and created, for the first time, five multi-member Senate districts. This interim plan ultimately became final in 1974 after the state failed to enact a new plan and, soon after, several North Dakota voters filed a federal lawsuit alleging the plan’s large population variance and use of multi-member Senate districts were not justified in violation of the 14th Amendment.

  • On January 27, 1975, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the court-adopted plan as violating the 14th Amendment, finding neither the population deviation nor use of multi-member districts were sufficiently justified by the court. The Court’s unanimous opinion explained that unless there are persuasive justifications, a court ordered legislative redistricting plan must avoid the use of multi-member districts and must achieve the goal of population equality with “little more than a de minimis variation.” It also stated that court-ordered plans must be held to higher standards than a state’s own plan and, if important state considerations require a departure from those standards, it’s the court’s responsibility to clearly explain why a single-member, minimal population variance plan can’t be adopted.

Significance: When redrawing a state's legislative districts as a remedy, federal courts are subject to the same, possibly more stringent, equal population requirements as are applicable to legislatively enacted plans, including the responsibility to justify any deviations from population equality and to state their connection to rational state policies.

Case Library

U.S. Supreme Court - 420 U.S. 1 (1975)