807 F. Supp. 2d 1096
M.D. Ala.2011Background
- August 23, 2011 city council election scheduled in Montgomery, Alabama; Plaintiffs, registered electors, allege equal protection and voting rights violations if election proceeds under the existing, precleared 2001 apportionment (based on 2000 census).
- Defendants are the City, mayor, seven of nine council members, and City Clerk; mayor and council have reapportionment duties under state law.
- The 2001 council districts were based on the 2000 census and precleared in 2002; 2010 census shows malapportionment with districts over- and underpopulated, creating substantial population deviations.
- Act No. 618 (Section 7.02) governs decennial reapportionment, triggering a timeline: mayor must propose plan within six months of census publication; council six months to enact; if not, mayor’s plan becomes the ordinance by operation of law; such plan cannot apply to elections within six months of enactment.
- Section 7.02 timeline makes August 23, 2011 election rely on the 2001 plan unless court enjoins; Defendants intend to proceed with the August 23 election under the 2001 plan; Plaintiffs seek to halt election or require timely redistricting.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the action is ripe for judicial review. | Plaintiffs contend timely federal review is warranted to prevent rights infringements. | Defendants argue ripeness because Section 7.02 timeframes and ongoing redistricting proceedings may render the suit premature. | Action deemed ripe for purposes of deciding merits. |
| Whether the 2001 apportionment plan violates Equal Protection. | Malapportioned districts deprive voters of equal protection under Reynolds principles. | Chapter 7.02 plan tied to decennial census can justify temporary imbalance; no constitutional violation. | No Equal Protection violation; Reynolds framework supports decennial reapportionment with some end-of-period imbalance. |
| Whether § 2 of the Voting Rights Act is violated by using the 2001 plan. | Use of malapportioned map dilutes minority voting strength. | Time lag between census and election does not create § 2 violation under Daley/Reynolds. | § 2 claim dismissed. |
| Whether the preliminary injunction should issue. | Court should halt election to allow lawful redistricting. | Given imminent election and Reynolds framework, equitable relief is inappropriate. | Preliminary injunction denied as moot. |
| Whether Act No. 618’s decennial plan is a reasonable framework justifying non-interference. | Act No. 618 is circumvented if court allows election under malapportioned map. | Act No. 618 provides a reasonably conceived plan tied to the census; court should defer to it. | Act No. 618 constitutes a reasonable plan; court won’t interfere. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964) (decennial reapportionment with some end-period imbalance is permissible if plan is reasonably conceived)
- Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380 (1991) (equal protection and Voting Rights Act considerations in reapportionment)
- Daley v. Illinois, 976 F.2d 335 (7th Cir. 1992) (defer to decennial plan; four-year terms may delay using new census data without violating constitution)
- Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (binding pre-1981 Fifth Circuit decisions adopted by Eleventh Circuit)