Oregon

Congressional

Primary Authority: The Oregon Legislative Assembly draws and enacts congressional plans, subject to the Governor’s veto. The Legislative Assembly can override a veto with a 2/3 vote in each chamber. No party currently has a veto-proof majority in either chamber.

If a bill is presented to the governor during session, the governor has 5 days to sign or veto it; otherwise, it becomes law without signature. If the bill is delivered to the governor during the last 5 days of the session, the governor must sign or veto it within 30 days of session adjournment; otherwise, it becomes law. Saturdays and Sundays are excluded from these calculations.

Mapping Timeline: The Legislative Assembly must hold at least 10 public hearings throughout the state prior to proposing a congressional plan and, after one is proposed, must hold 5 additional public hearings throughout the state prior to adopting a final plan. While there is no deadline for the Legislative Assembly to enact a final congressional plan, if they fail to do so by July 1 of the regular session in the year following the decennial census, any voter can file a petition and proposed plan in the Marion County Circuit Court by August 1 of that year requesting the court adopt a congressional redistricting plan. [Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 188.016; 188.125]

Redistricting Criteria: As nearly as practicable, congressional districts must: be contiguous, be of equal population, utilize existing geographic or political boundaries, not divide communities of common interest; and be connected by transportation links.

PROHIBITED: Drawn for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring any political party, incumbent legislator or other person; drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting strength of any language or ethnic minority group. [Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.010]

Public Input & Transparency: Prior to proposing a congressional plan, the Legislative Assembly must hold at least 10 public hearings, including at least 1 in each of the state’s congressional districts and at least 1 in areas that have experienced the largest shifts in population since the previous decennial census. To the extent practicable, after proposing a plan but before adopting one, they must hold 5 public hearings, including at least 1 in the areas with the largest population shifts. Appropriate public notice must be given of the time and location of each hearing, and provisions must be made for individuals to provide public testimony remotely thereat. [Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.016]

Map Challenges: On or before August 1 of the year following the decennial census, any voter can file a petition in the Marion County Circuit Court challenging the Legislative Assembly’s congressional plan as violating any applicable requirements. In the same time frame, if the Legislative Assembly failed to enact a plan by July 1 of that year, any voter can file a petition in the Marion County Circuit Court requesting that the court complete congressional redistricting.

For both types of petitions, the Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court appoints a special judicial panel consisting of one judge serving as a judge pro tempore from each of the state’s congressional districts. The Chief Justice selects one of the appointed judges to preside over the matter and make all procedural and evidentiary rulings.

For challenges to an enacted plan, the panel must decide whether to dismiss the petition by September 1 and, if it is dismissed, the petitioner can appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court by filing a notice on or before September 15. For petitions not dismissed, the panel must render its decision by October 1, which can be appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court by filing a notice on or before October 15. If the panel strikes down an enacted plan, or if no plan was enacted, they may create their own plan.

There are varying procedures and timelines specified for appeals at the Oregon Supreme Court depending on the panel decision being appealed. [Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.125]

Legislative

Primary Authority: Legislative plans are enacted by the Oregon Legislative Assembly, subject to the Governor’s veto. The Legislative Assembly can override a veto with a 2/3 vote in each chamber. No party currently has a veto-proof majority in either chamber. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6]

If a bill is presented to the governor during session, the governor has 5 days to sign or veto it; otherwise, it becomes law without signature. If the bill is delivered to the governor during the last 5 days of the session, the governor must sign or veto it within 30 days of session adjournment; otherwise, it becomes law. Saturdays and Sundays are excluded from these calculations.

Backup Authority: If the Legislative Assembly fails to enact legislative plans by its deadline, authority passes to the Secretary of State which must file its final plans with the Oregon Supreme Court by August 15 of the odd-numbered year regular session following the decennial census. There are slightly modified public input and map challenges procedures for this backup process. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6]

• Public Input & Transparency: The Secretary must hold at least one public hearing to collect public input and suggestions prior to proposing a plan. After proposing but before adopting final plans, the Secretary must hold at least 5 public hearings in different regions of the state, including at least one in areas which experienced the greatest population shifts. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6; Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.016]
• Map Challenges: On or before September 15 of the redistricting year, any voter can petition the Oregon Supreme Court to review a Secretary of State’s plan. If the Court finds the plan to be valid, it must render its decision on or before October 15 of that year. If it strikes down the plan, the Court must return the plan to the Secretary of State by November 1 of that year with instructions to correct only those portions found deficient. The Secretary of State must file its revised plan with the Court on or before December 1 of that year. On or before December 15 of that year, the Court must review the revised plan and, if still found to be deficient, the Court may then make corrections as necessary. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6]

Mapping Timeline: The Legislative Assembly must hold at least 10 public hearings throughout the state prior to proposing legislative plans and, after proposing them, must hold 5 additional public hearings throughout the state prior to adopting final plans. The Legislative Assembly must enact final plans by July 1 of the odd-numbered year regular session next following the decennial census. If it fails, authority passes to the Secretary of State. Maps become effective on either the 2nd Monday in January of the next odd-numbered year after the deadline for final plans or January 1 of the calendar year next following the deadline for final plans. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6; Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.016]

Redistricting Criteria:

• State Senate: Contiguous; Respect county boundaries. As nearly as practicable, districts must: be contiguous, be of equal population, utilize existing geographic or political boundaries, not divide communities of common interest; and be connected by transportation links.
• State House: As nearly as practicable, districts must: be contiguous, be of equal population, utilize existing geographic or political boundaries, not divide communities of common interest; and be connected by transportation links.
• PROHIBITED (Both): Drawn for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring any political party, incumbent legislator or other person; drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting strength of any language or ethnic minority group. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 7; Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.010]

Public Input & Transparency: Prior to proposing a congressional plan, the Legislative Assembly must hold at least 10 public hearings, including at least 1 in each of the state’s congressional districts and at least 1 in areas that have experienced the largest shifts in population since the previous decennial census. To the extent practicable, after proposing a plan but before adopting one, they must hold 5 public hearings, including at least 1 in the areas with the largest population shifts. Appropriate public notice must be given of the time and location of each hearing, and provisions must be made for individuals to provide public testimony remotely thereat. [Ore. Rev. Stat. § 188.016]

Map Challenges: On or before August 1 of the reapportionment year, any voter can petition the Oregon Supreme Court to review a Legislative Assembly’s legislative plan. If the Court upholds the plan, it must issue its decision by September 1 of that year. If it strikes down the plan, the Court must issue its decision specifically identifying the plan’s deficiencies and file it with the Secretary of State on or before September 15. The Secretary must then hold at least one public hearing and file a corrected plan with the Court on or before November 1 of that year. On or before November 15 of that year, the Court must review the corrected plan and, if struck down again, the Court may make corrections to the plan as necessary. [Ore. Const. art. IV, § 6]

Ballot Measures & Referendum Processes

Types of Measures: Direct initiatives are permitted to amend statutes and the state constitution, and referendums are permitted to amend statutes. Legislatively initiated ballot measures may amend both statutes and the state constitution.

Single-Subject Rule: Yes.

Initiative Subject Restrictions: No.

Signature Requirements: 1000 preliminary signatures are required. Constitutional amendments require signatures equal to 8% of all votes cast for gubernatorial candidates in the last general election, 6% for statutory amendments, and 4% for referendums. 1,952,883 people voted for a gubernatorial candidate in the 2022 general election in Oregon, so 156,231 are required for constitutional amendments, 117,173 for statutory amendments, and 78,116 for referendums.

Submission Deadlines: Initiative petitions must be submitted no less than 4 months prior to the election in which the petition is to appear on the ballot (July 5, 2024). Referendums must be submitted within 90 days after the end of the session in which the law was passed.

Circulation Period: There is no circulation period, but generally must be less than 2 years due to biannual votes.

Ballot Title and Summary: The ballot title and summary are drafted by the Attorney General. After receiving public comments, the final version is also written by the Attorney General. Expedited reviews for titles and summaries are permitted.

Other Requirements: A fiscal impact statement is required. Measures that include a proposition to amend voting requirements need a supermajority to be passed. The supermajority required is the percentage of votes proposed in the measure. The Legislature can amend or repeal a statutory initiative through a majority vote. The Legislature can amend or repeal an amendment through a majority vote in both chambers of the Legislature. Initiatives are permitted on general election ballots, but not on primary or special election or odd-year ballots.

[Ore. Const. art. II, § 23; art. IV, § 1; Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 250.005 – 250.150; Oregon State Initiative and Referendum Manual]

Previous Redistricting Cycles

2020

• Congressional
  • Original Plan – SB 881
    • Passed = September 27, 2021 (D-controlled)
    • Signed = September 27, 2021
  • Litigation History
    • State ex rel Rep. Kotek v. Fagan, No. S068364 (Ore. Apr. 9, 2021): On March 10, 2021, an Oregon state representative and state senator filed a petition with the Oregon Supreme Court on behalf of the Oregon Legislative Assembly seeking relief from the state's constitutional redistricting deadlines, citing the delayed release of 2020 Census population data. On April 9, 2021, the Oregon Supreme Court granted the petitioners’ request for a preemptory writ of mandamus, finding that the delayed census data release would make complying with the constitutional deadlines impossible and that the court could modify these deadlines without significantly affecting the duties of the Legislature and the Secretary, the rights of electors, or the general election cycle.
    • Clarno v. Fagan, No. 21CV40180 (Ore. Cir. Ct., Marion Cty. Nov. 24, 2021): On October 11, 2021, a former Oregon Secretary of State and several Oregon voters filed a petition in state court challenging the Legislative Assembly's enacted congressional redistricting plan as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander and as violating the state’s statutory redistricting criteria relating to partisan favoritism and the preservation of communities of interest and political subdivisions. On November 24, 2021, the court issued an opinion upholding the plan and dismissing the petitioners' challenge on the grounds the enacted plan was “within the range of plans” that Oregon courts and the legislature have adopted in the past and the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently establish their constitutional claim.
• Legislative
  • Original Plans – SB 882
    • Passed = September 27, 2021 (D-controlled)
    • Signed = September 27, 2021
  • Litigation History
    • State ex rel Rep. Kotek v. Fagan, No. S068364 (Ore. Apr. 9, 2021): On March 10, 2021, an Oregon state representative and state senator filed a petition with the Oregon Supreme Court on behalf of the Oregon Legislative Assembly seeking relief from the state's constitutional redistricting deadlines, citing the delayed release of 2020 Census population data. On April 9, 2021, the Oregon Supreme Court granted the petitioners’ request for a preemptory writ of mandamus, finding that the delayed census data release would make complying with the constitutional deadlines impossible and that the court could modify these deadlines without significantly affecting the duties of the Legislature and the Secretary, the rights of electors, or the general election cycle.
    • Sheehan v. Oregon Legislative Assembly, No. S068991 (Ore. Nov. 22, 2021): On October 25, 2021, a group of Oregon voters filed a petition with the Oregon Supreme Court challenging the Legislative Assembly's redistricting process and resulting enacted legislative redistricting plans as violating several state redistricting statutes relating to partisan bias in districts and public testimony. On November 22, 2021, the Oregon Supreme Court released an opinion ruling in favor of the defendants and upholding the plan on the grounds the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently support their alleged violations.
    • Calderwood v. Oregon Legislative Assembly, No. S068989 (Ore. Nov. 22, 2021): On October 25, 2021, two Oregon voters filed a petition with the Oregon Supreme Court challenging the Legislative Assembly's enacted state House redistricting plan as violating various state redistricting statutes relating to incumbency protection, the preservation of communities of interest, and adherence to natural and logical boundaries. On November 22, 2021, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion ruling in favor of the defendants and upholding the plans on the grounds the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently support their claims.

2010

• Congressional
  • Original Plan – SB 990
    • Passed = June 30, 2011 (Split-control)
    • Signed = June 30, 2011
  • Litigation History
    • None
• Legislative
  • Original Plan – SB 989
    • Passed = June 13, 2011 (Split-control)
    • Signed = June 13, 2011
  • Litigation History
    • None

2000

• Congressional
  • Original Plan – SB 500
    • Passed = 2001 (R-controlled)
    • Vetoed = June 28, 2001 (D-controlled)
  • State Court’s Plan (D-Governor vetoed R-controlled Legislature’s plan)
    • Adopted = October 19, 2001
  • Litigation History
    • Perrin v. Kitzhaber, No. 0107-07021 (Ore. Cir. Ct., Multnomah Cty. Oct. 19, 2001): After the Republican Legislature’s congressional plan was vetoed by the state’s Democratic Governor, a state circuit court was petitioned to draw and adopt a constitutional congressional plan in advance of the 2002 election. On October 19, 2001, the circuit court ruled that the state’s then-existing congressional districts were unconstitutional due to being malapportioned and ordered the adoption of its own congressional plan.
• Legislative
  • Original Plan – HB 2001
    • Passed = 2001 (R-controlled)
    • Vetoed = June 28, 2001
  • Secretary of State’s Plan (D-Governor vetoed the R-controlled Legislature’s legislative plan)
    • Approved in Part = October 18, 2001 (minor corrections made and subsequently approved)
  • Litigation History
    • Hartung v. Bradbury, 33 P.3d 972 (Ore. 2001): After the Republican Legislature’s legislative plan was vetoed by the state’s Democratic Governor, legislative redistricting responsibility fell to the Secretary of State. Several different groups of plaintiffs filed constitutional challenges to the Secretary’s issued plan on various grounds, including substantial population deviations in violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and noncompliance with the state’s redistricting criteria. O October 18, 2001, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants on all claims except for one relating to a malapportioned state House district caused by an error in census-data. The Court ordered the Secretary of State to correct the plan and refile it by December 1, 2001, which the Secretary of State did.

Active Ballot Measures

• Oregon Initiative Petition 13 (2024)
  • Status - Proposed
  • Summary - This citizen initiative would give responsibility for legislative and congressional redistricting to a 12-member redistricting commission. The state legislature would no longer have the authority to draw legislative and congressional maps. A panel of 3 administrative law judges would be appointed to review the applications and the Secretary of State would select the first 6 commissioners by lot, 2 affiliated with the largest political party in the sate, 2 affiliated with the second largest political party in the state, and 2 unaffiliated as described by the measure. The 6 randomly-selected commissioners would then choose the final 6 commissioners by March 15, 2023, and thereafter August 15 in each year ending in the number zero.

In The News

• Group Stymied in Bid for 2022 Independent Redistricting Ballot Measure Files Again for 2024, KTVZ (8/24/22)
• Oregon Supreme Court Deals Setback to Campaign for Independent Redistricting Commission, Oregon Live (4/29/22)
• Judicial Panel Upholds Oregon Democrats’ New US Congressional Districts, OPB (11/29/21)
• Oregon Supreme Court Dismisses Challenges to Democrats’ New Legislative Districts, Oregon Live (11/22/21)
• Oregon’s Redistricting Maps Official, After Lawmakers Pass Them, Gov. Kate Brown Signs Off, Oregon Live (10/1/21)
• Oregon Democrats Unveil their Redistricting Proposal, Setting up Partisan Clash in Salem, OPB (9/19/21)
• Oregon Legislature to Hold Special Session on Redistricting Maps, Statesman Journal (9/10/21)
• Oregon Democrats Propose a Congressional District Map that Would Likely Give their Party 5 of 6 Seats in U.S. House, Oregon Live (9/3/21)
• Hearings on Redistricting are Next Week; Legislative Deadline is Sept. 27, Argus Observer (8/31/21)
• Dems Blast Dems for 'Arrogant' Moves as 2022 Redistricting Starts, Baker City Herald (7/19/21)
• Top Democrats Unlikely to Allow Public Hearing on Oregon Independent Redistricting Proposal, Oregon Live (6/10/21)
• Bill Aligns Oregon's Congressional Redistricting with Legislative Redistricting, Portland Tribune (5/13/21)
• Oregon’s Steady Growth Lands it an Additional US House Seat, AP (4/26/21)
• Redistricting Group Files New Initiative Meant to Pressure Legislature to Act, Oregon Live (4/19/21)
• Deal Gives GOP more Redistricting Power to Speed up Bills, AP (4/15/21)
• Lawmakers Given more Time to Redraw Oregon Political Lines, AP (4/9/21)
• Oregon Supreme Court Floats Hurried-up Timeline for Redrawing Political Maps, OPB (3/30/21)
• Oregon Secretary of State Hires Constitutional Law Expert to Strengthen her Position to Have Say in Redistricting, Oregon Live (3/20/21)
• Oregon State Leaders Split on how to Resolve Redistricting Dilemma as Deadline Approaches, The Center Square (3/11/21)
• Census Delay Leaves Oregon's Redistricting Process in a Lurch, OPB (2/4/21)
• Legislature could be Cut Out of Redistricting by Late Census Numbers, Oregon Capital Insider (2/2/21)
• Meet the Oregon Secretary of State Candidates: Shemia Fagan and Kim Thatcher, KGW (9/18/20)
• The Census has Long Failed to Accurately Tally Populations in Indian Country. COVID-19 is Hampering Attempts to Fix that, Underscore (9/4/20)
• Oregon Redistricting Measure Blocked from November Ballot by Appeals Court Decision, OPB (9/2/20)
• U.S. Supreme Court Hits Pause on Oregon Redistricting Ballot Measure, Oregon Live (8/11/20)
• Oregon Attorney General Takes Fight Against Redistricting Initiative to US Supreme Court, Oregon Public Broadcasting (7/29/20)
• Federal Appeals Court Denies State's Motion to Halt Signature Gathering for Redistricting Measure, Willamette Week (7/24/20)
• 9th Circuit Rejects Bid by Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum to Halt Signature Gathering for Redistricting Initiative, Oregon Live (7/23/20)
• Oregon AG Appeals Federal Judge's Order on Redistricting Bid, AP (7/15/20)
• Under Federal Judge's Order, Secretary of State Bev Clarno Extends Deadline for Redistricting Measure, Willamette Week (7/14/20)
• Oregon Redistricting Measure May Go to Voters After Judge's Ruling, OPB (7/10/20)
• Redistricting Measure Aimed at November Ballot Falls Short, Willamette Week (7/3/20)
• Potential OR Initiative Could Cut Down on Gerrymandering, Public News Service (6/26/20)
• Proposed Oregon Initiative Could Curb Gerrymandering, KTVZ (6/25/20)
• Redistricting Reformers to Oregon Voters: You've Got Mail, The Fulcrum (6/11/20)
• Oregon Redistricting Campaign Hopes Huge Mailing will Help Initiative Qualify for November Ballot, Oregon Live (6/10/20)
• In Face of Pandemic, Opponents of Partisan Redistricting in Oregon Pursue New Ballot Initiative Strategy, Oregon Public Broadcasting (6/4/20)
• Campaign Pushes for Citizen Commission, not Legislature, to Handle Redistricting in Oregon, Oregon Live (5/13/20)