Coalition for Non-Partisan Redistricting
2900 W Anderson Ln
C-200-322
Austin, TX 78757
		
512/299-5001 
jon.roland@constitution.org
| Click on the button to get the indicated file format: | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Format | HTML | Text | WP | RTF | Word | Video | |
| Local |  |  |  |  |  |  | V | 
| Remote |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
 
  
  Proposal for non-partisan congressional redistricting plans in
		  Texas
 Proposal for non-partisan congressional redistricting plans in
		  Texas Order by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, adopting a redistricting proposal and ordering the election to be conducted according to it in those districts.
 Order by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, adopting a redistricting proposal and ordering the election to be conducted according to it in those districts. Texas Election Code Section 204.021, according to which election
		  is to be held November 7, 2006.
 Texas Election Code Section 204.021, according to which election
		  is to be held November 7, 2006.
		 Texas Election Code Chapter 203, referred to by 204.021, prescribing how to hold special elections to fill legislative vacancies.
 Texas Election Code Chapter 203, referred to by 204.021, prescribing how to hold special elections to fill legislative vacancies.
		 Texas Election Code Section 172.024, referred to by 203.005, defining filing fees for primary election, which appears to only apply for parties that hold primaries, and not minor parties like the Libertarian Party of Texas.
 Texas Election Code Section 172.024, referred to by 203.005, defining filing fees for primary election, which appears to only apply for parties that hold primaries, and not minor parties like the Libertarian Party of Texas.
		 Texas Election Code Section 141.062, referred to by 203.005, defining petition requirements.
 Texas Election Code Section 141.062, referred to by 203.005, defining petition requirements.
		 Opinion by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, explaining their order.
 Opinion by U.S. District Court — August 4, 2006, explaining their order. 
  
  
  Part 1.
 Part 1. 
  
  
  Part 2.
 Part 2. Exhibit A — Plot of curves
		  representing alternative maps and the Standard of Proof proposed.
 Exhibit A — Plot of curves
		  representing alternative maps and the Standard of Proof proposed. Order by U.S. District Court — June 29, 2006, calling for filing of proposals by July 14 and hearing on August 3, 2006.
 Order by U.S. District Court — June 29, 2006, calling for filing of proposals by July 14 and hearing on August 3, 2006. Remand by U.S. Supreme Court — June 28, 2006.
 Remand by U.S. Supreme Court — June 28, 2006. 
  
  Amicus curiae brief of Jon
		  Roland in Session v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, January
		  20, 2005.
 Amicus curiae brief of Jon
		  Roland in Session v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, January
		  20, 2005. 
  
  PR: Non-partisan redistricting
		  gains support, July 1, 2003
 PR: Non-partisan redistricting
		  gains support, July 1, 2003 
  
  PR: Testimony, House
		  Redistricting Committee, July 2, 2003
 PR: Testimony, House
		  Redistricting Committee, July 2, 2003 Demo
		  of Texas congressional redistricting. (Media Player 233MB) Video interview of staff of the Redistricting Division of the Texas Legislative Council, May 16, 2003, and
		  aired on public access cable May 18, 2003.
		  Lower-res
		  version. 
		  Higher-res
		  version. You will need the latest version of RealPlayer to view it, and a high-bandwidth
		  connection to the Internet.
 Demo
		  of Texas congressional redistricting. (Media Player 233MB) Video interview of staff of the Redistricting Division of the Texas Legislative Council, May 16, 2003, and
		  aired on public access cable May 18, 2003.
		  Lower-res
		  version. 
		  Higher-res
		  version. You will need the latest version of RealPlayer to view it, and a high-bandwidth
		  connection to the Internet. Texas Legislative
		  Council
 Texas Legislative
		  Council Texas AG Opinion: Congressional
		  redistricting for 2003-2010: GA-0063
 Texas AG Opinion: Congressional
		  redistricting for 2003-2010: GA-0063 Texas Constitution: State House
		  of Representatives Redistricting — Instructive, in that it does not
		  mandate the Legislature approve a particular map, but allows for legislation to
		  provide for generation of maps by a computer.
 Texas Constitution: State House
		  of Representatives Redistricting — Instructive, in that it does not
		  mandate the Legislature approve a particular map, but allows for legislation to
		  provide for generation of maps by a computer. Redistricting Software — Used
		  to draw district boundaries. Can be used to make districts that do not take
		  into account voting patterns of the interests of incumbents.
 Redistricting Software — Used
		  to draw district boundaries. Can be used to make districts that do not take
		  into account voting patterns of the interests of incumbents. Fixing the Reapportionment
		  Mess, by Bill Blomberg, Dec. 7, 2000 — Calls for drawing electoral
		  districts using impartial computer programs.
 Fixing the Reapportionment
		  Mess, by Bill Blomberg, Dec. 7, 2000 — Calls for drawing electoral
		  districts using impartial computer programs. Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Gary King, Bernard Grofman, Andrew Gelman, and Jonathan N. Katz, in Support of Neither Party — Calls for Court to adopt "symmetry standard" for determining whether a district map is unconstitutionally gerrymandered. Does not provide "standard of proof" requested by Justice Kennedy in Vieth v. Jubelirer, but that was indicated in Roland brief above.
 Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Gary King, Bernard Grofman, Andrew Gelman, and Jonathan N. Katz, in Support of Neither Party — Calls for Court to adopt "symmetry standard" for determining whether a district map is unconstitutionally gerrymandered. Does not provide "standard of proof" requested by Justice Kennedy in Vieth v. Jubelirer, but that was indicated in Roland brief above. Brief Of Samuel Issacharoff, Burt Neubourne, and Richard A. Pildes as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants — Interesting argument that got no traction before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006.
 Brief Of Samuel Issacharoff, Burt Neubourne, and Richard A. Pildes as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants — Interesting argument that got no traction before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006.Drafts of bills for automated non-partisan congressional redistricting.
 
  
  Variant 0 — Would redraw districts every two
		  years, split up to 50 counties.
 Variant 0 — Would redraw districts every two
		  years, split up to 50 counties. 
  
  Variant 1 — Would redraw districts every ten
		  years, split up to 20 counties.
 Variant 1 — Would redraw districts every ten
		  years, split up to 20 counties.Texas Legislative Rules of Procedure
Recent federal court cases
 Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, originally in the Eastern District, Third Circuit, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
 Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, originally in the Eastern District, Third Circuit, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 
		 Jenner collection —
				Links to most of the case pleadings
 Jenner collection —
				Links to most of the case pleadings Votelaw Announcement June 27,
				2003 — Links to some of the case pleadings
 Votelaw Announcement June 27,
				2003 — Links to some of the case pleadings Reform Institute Press Release
				September 3, 2003 — Reform Institute Asks the U.S. Supreme Court to
				End Gerrymandering & Restore Competitive Elections
 Reform Institute Press Release
				September 3, 2003 — Reform Institute Asks the U.S. Supreme Court to
				End Gerrymandering & Restore Competitive Elections Reform Institute Press Release
				September 25, 2003 — U.S. Supreme Court Schedules Oral Argument in
				Pennsylvania Redistricting Case for December 10, 2003
 Reform Institute Press Release
				September 25, 2003 — U.S. Supreme Court Schedules Oral Argument in
				Pennsylvania Redistricting Case for December 10, 2003 U.S. Supreme Court
				docket
 U.S. Supreme Court
				docket Reform Institute amicus
				brief — Sets forth the arguments to reject gerrymandering.
 Reform Institute amicus
				brief — Sets forth the arguments to reject gerrymandering. Texas House Democratic Caucus
				amicus brief — Filed by Democrat members of Texas House of
				Representatives.
 Texas House Democratic Caucus
				amicus brief — Filed by Democrat members of Texas House of
				Representatives.Comments
Very impressive work.  Despite the army of law professors touting their theories you alone seem to have a handle on a lawful way out of the gerrymander mess.
— Michael Richardson, Ballot Access Project, Email 2006/08/04