Practice Areas

 

Practice Area Details

pdf PRINT TO PDF

Redistricting

The act of redistricting is a highly complex process that implicates constitutional standards, the federal Voting Rights Act, and various state and local redistricting criteria.

In 2011, most state and local government bodies including the State Legislature and the newly created Citizens' Redistricting Commission, county boards of supervisors, city councils, school districts, and special districts will be required to redraw representative districts based on the 2010 census.

For the last three redistricting cycles, Remcho, Johansen & Purcell has provided advice to governmental agencies, including the California State Assembly, nonprofits, and other interested parties about redistricting criteria and how to reduce the risks that a plan may be successfully challenged.  Our attorneys have also successfully defended challenges to completed redistricting plans.

Over the last 25 years, Remcho, Johansen & Purcell, LLP has been involved in virtually every case involving California's redistricting process.

Representative highlights of this work include:

  • City of Berkeley v. Dupuis, Alameda County Superior Court, No. RG14720117 (2014).
    Successfully represented the City in effort to use Council-approved redistricting map until a referendum election took place.
  • Lee v. City of Los Angeles, No. CV 12-06618-CBM (C.D. Cal.) (ongoing).
    Successfully defended the City of Los Angeles's 2012 Redistricting Ordinance against a lawsuit challenging the boundaries created for City Council Districts 8, 9, and 10 on the grounds that district boundaries violated the Federal and State Constitutions, and the Los Angeles City Charter.
  • Nadler v. Schwarzenegger, 137 Cal. App. 4th 1327 (2006).
    Successfully defended the State’s 2001 redistricting plan against a lawsuit challenging the state legislative plans on the grounds that they violated the California Constitution.
  • Cano v. Davis, 191 F. Supp. 2d 1135 (C.D. Cal. 2001); 211 F. Supp. 2d 1208 (C.D. Cal. 2002), aff'd, 537 U.S. 1100 (2003).
    Represented the California Assembly in a successful defense of the State's 2001 redistricting plan against a federal lawsuit challenging the congressional and state legislative plans on the grounds that they violated the Constitution and the federal Voting Rights Act.
  • Department of Commerce v. U.S. House of Representatives, 525 U.S. 316 (1999).
    Represented the California Assembly before the United States Supreme Court in a case challenging the way in which the decennial census is conducted.
  • Wilson v. Eu, 1 Cal. 4th 707 (1992).
    Represented the California Assembly in proceedings before the California Supreme Court regarding the submission and enactment of a statewide redistricting plan by court-appointed special masters.
  • Assembly v. Deukmejian, 30 Cal. 3d 638 (1982).
    Represented the California Assembly in challenge to referenda against redistricting statutes passed by the Legislature.
* The results described above were dependent on the facts of that particular case.  Prior results do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes.