Case Summary

On April 26, 2021 a group of registered voters in Minnesota filed a lawsuit against the Minnesota Secretary of State challenging the state's then-current legislative and congressional districts as unconstitutional. The plaintiffs alleged due to population shifts over the last decade, the state's then-present legislative and congressional districts had become unconstitutionally malapportioned in violation of the one person, one vote constitutional requirement, and that the Governor and State Legislature would be unable to reach a consensus to enact new, lawful plans in time for the upcoming 2022 elections. They sought a declaratory judgment that the then-current legislative and congressional districts violated article I, § 2 and article IV, § 3 of the Minnesota Constitution and Article I, § 2, and the 1st and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. They also sought an injunction barring the defendant from giving any effect to those plans and for the court to implement new legally compliant districts should the Governor and Legislature fail to enact new plans by the February 15, 2022 statutory deadline.

On March 22, 2021 the Minnesota Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' request for the appointment of a special redistricting panel but ordered the case be stayed until it was determined that the judicial branch would have to intervene to assure valid redistricting plans were in place for the 2022 state legislative and congressional elections. On June 30, 2021 the Minnesota Supreme Court lifted the stay and appointed a special redistricting panel to handle the case.

On February 15, 2022 the special redistricting panel issued orders enjoining Minnesota's then-current congressional and legislative districts from being used in the 2022 elections and adopting the court's own congressional and legislative plans for use in future primary and general elections.

Related Case: Wattson v. Simon

Case Library

Minnesota District Court, Ramsey County - 62-cv-21-2213

Minnesota Supreme Court - A21-0546 [together with Wattson v. Simon, A21-0243]