Court Upholds Democrats’ ‘82 Cal. Reapportionment : Ruling Says GOP Hasn’t Suffered

A federal court panel, saying Republicans were hardly “shut out” by a pro-Democratic reapportionment of California’s congressional districts in 1982, today threw out the GOP challenge to the remapping.

The three-judge panel voted 2 to 1 to dismiss a suit by Republicans claiming that the drawing of district boundaries by the Democratic-controlled Legislature violated the constitutional rights of GOP voters to equality in voting.

Marguerite Leoni, attorney for Republicans, said the ruling will be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. She said that it is highly unlikely the high court can act in time to affect the 1988 election but that 1990 was a possibility.

Party Not Shut Out

The court said a partisan reapportionment is unconstitutional only if one party is effectively “shut out” of the political process. Republicans cannot make that claim in California, as they hold the governor’s office, one U.S. Senate seat and 40% of the House seats, the court said.

“California Republicans represent so potent a political force that it is unnecessary for the judiciary to intervene,” said the opinion by Judge Cecil F. Poole of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

U.S. District Judge Alfonso J. Zirpoli joined in the opinion. The third panel member, U.S. District Judge Robert H. Schnacke, said he will file a dissenting opinion later.

Democrats have a 27-18 majority in the state’s congressional delegation. The district lines were drawn by the late Rep. Phil Burton (D-San Francisco), approved by the Legislature, and signed by Democratic Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. just before he left office.

Shape of Districts Retained

The ruling leaves in place the shape of districts for the 45-member congressional delegation conceived by Burton and pushed through the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

The effect of the plan has been to give incumbents strong political protection by drawing boundaries in such as way that most districts were either heavily Republican or heavily Democratic.

That minimized the competition between the major parties for congressional seats.

“The tortured history of this litigation is one of repeated attempts by the plaintiffs (Republicans) to frame a complaint which would withstand . . . a motion to dismiss. These repeated attempts have come to naught and have demonstrated that (the Republicans) are unable to state a federal constitutional claim,” Poole wrote.