Drawing the Line.
States Take Different Paths in Redistricting
By Lexington Souers
In January 2023, Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo addressed a crowded Legislature in his first State of the State address. The 2024 CSG National President used his platform to address ending partisan redistricting. Through his speech, he called for the creation of an independent, nonpartisan commission.
“Nevada needs to end partisan redistricting,” Lombardo said. “Nevada voters should have the right to select their elected leaders, not the other way around. We need an independent, nonpartisan commission that is subject to the Open Meeting Law to redraw districts every 10 years. It’s time we do this. Mark my words. If the Legislature can’t make meaningful progress in this critical area, these reforms should be placed before the voters during the next election.”
In Nevada and states across the nation, churches, community centers and other gathering spaces filled with voters in November. Chosen based on their proximity to community members within each electoral district, each polling place is a physical space voters can participate in democracy. Electoral districts are redrawn every 10 years and follow complex state and federal laws.
The U.S. Constitution, under Article I, Section 4, grants states authority to oversee elections, while also giving Congress the power to “alter such regulations.” Resulting federal law requires one person, one vote. Simply put, for every district, there must be the same number of people in each one. This process is also called equipopulation.
“Since the 1950s, the Supreme Court has interpreted the equality provisions of our Constitution to require the principle one person, one vote, which means that districts have to be roughly equally populated,” said Kareem Crayton, vice president of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Washington, D.C., office.
“How a state or jurisdiction achieves that is sort of what the purpose of redistricting is set out to do — that every 10 years or so conducts the census of the country and we learn people who have moved in, moved out, been born, passed away, and all of those must be taken into account in the way that we divide districts.”
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.”
United States Constitution
Article 1: Legislative Branch
Section 4: Congress
Clause 1: Elections Clause
As well, federal law states that each district can only elect one congressional candidate, a rule which many states have adopted for their own elections.
State constitutions and laws vary in the way they direct districts to be drawn. They also do not hold as strictly to the one person, one vote doctrine and can instead be “substantially” equal, for the most part. Other state law concerns include having contiguous districts, consideration of political or geographic boundaries and compactness. Litigation often ensues over what these terms mean and if states are correctly applying them.
“Beyond the question as to how many bodies are in each district, which was pleading to be equal, there are open questions as to how we achieve that equality, and that’s really where the sort of policy, and frankly, politics of redistricting come into play,” Crayton said. “Inevitably, there will be moments where some of those values come into conflict, and that is where a decision-maker is faced with a choice, coming up with either a decision or rule for how to put one factor over another, or a process whereby you take in viewpoints from the public that can help you figure out what might be the best overall answer.”
States draw maps in several different ways, typically every decade, following the release of U.S. Census data. The most popular ways are by legislature or independent commission, according to data collected on Loyola Law School’s “All About Redistricting” web page.
A minority of states do so through other forms of commissions. What can further confuse constituents is that some states take different approaches for state and federal redistricting. For example, Missouri redistricts state elections under a politician commission but redistricts federal election districts through its Legislature.
Thirty-four states redistrict state lines through the legislature, with 33 redistricting congressional districts. Six states only have one congressional district, with the legislature having redistricting authority. In most states, redistricting is treated as any legislation would be, with committee members sponsoring legislation that must pass through the traditional legislative process. Other states, like Maine, require a supermajority. Some states use a joint resolution rather than a statute.
However, simply giving power to the legislature is often far more nuanced, with advisory or specific commissions taking over or providing input. In states with advisory commissions, non-legislators are invited to give input. Iowa implemented an advisory commission in 1980, following a plan struck down by the Iowa Supreme Court and active efforts from the Iowa League of Women Voters. Iowa leaders credit the processes’ success to the “blind system,” which hopes to remove partisanship from redistricting.
“Inevitably, there will be moments where some of those values come into conflict, and that is where a decision-maker is faced with a choice...or a process whereby you take in viewpoints from the public that can help you figure out what might be the best overall answer.”
Kareem Crayton
Vice President, Brennan Center for Justice, Washington, D.C.
“It is, in essence, a system designed to enact a redistricting plan in an efficient and timely manner without political gridlock and to prevent political gerrymandering,” wrote Ed Cook in a 2002 article for the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Legislatures, or, in Maryland’s case, the governor, still have a final say in the advisory commission’s plan.
Other states have backup commissions prepared to step in when legislatures fail to equitably create a plan. How these commissions enter the redistricting process varies by state, with some being single members, such as the governor or secretary of state, and others being a specific group of officials.
Politician commissions, which are made up of elected officials, are found in seven states. In some states, legislative or party leaders pick members. In others, members are decided by their elected position. Based on the rules surrounding the commission, some may be more flexible and have more independence.
For a few states, independent commissions draw districts. Commission members are outside of the legislature or public office. In most states using independent commissions, commission members are also banned from seeking office for a period of years after they serve. Some states also extend the prohibition on elected officials to include lobbyists and legislative staff. In New York and Washington, statutes allow the legislatures to override the commissions’ districting maps.
“I would say, generally, the ones that have been successful have a commission,” Crayton said. “As an example, California, which for the second time demonstrated that in a really complex state, citizens can come together, with the help of experts and the input of civil society in the public comment process and arrive at an answer that’s pretty defensible and tries to resolve some pretty thorny matters.”
Commissions, though, do waver on their success. In Virginia, the political commission could not agree on maps and control of redistricting passed to the state Supreme Court. In Ohio, voters will have the chance to move from a legislative system with a backup commission to an independent commission.
Legislature
The legislature has ultimate control over how district lines are drawn, but some states may have advisory committees or allow a veto by a governor.
Commission
Commission states utilize an outside, extra-legislative commission to draw maps. Commissions can be both political and non-political.
Hybrid
In states with hybrid systems, both the legislature and a commission draft the state’s maps.


Redistricting is often highly partisan, with the majority party controlling how maps are made. This can lead to challenges in court, expending extensive resources and delaying implementation. Legislature-led redistricting often occurs in private, without giving constituents much involvement.
Crayton said that independent commissions give people who may not have a history of involvement in redistricting or elections a chance to contribute. In many commissions, a public comment period is required — involvement in which Crayton said is aided by the internet. By allowing online or virtual submissions, more people can be involved.
“There’s no shortage of interest,” Crayton said. ”I think the question in places where there just hasn’t been a process in place before is how quickly people get the word that there is an opportunity to engage.”
In Virginia, which Crayton acknowledged has traditionally featured a partisan process, people were able to participate in person and electronically. According to Crayton, an open comment period in the internet age allows people in all regions of the state to provide input.
States have until 2030 before the next census is conducted, after which lines will need to be redrawn. With over 150 pieces of legislation concerning redistricting drafted in 2023 and 2024, state leaders and constituents can expect to see the issue grow, and as both conflict and community interest increases, more states may turn to bipartisan or independent commissions.
“As the main issues become clearer, the traditional way of drawing lines in secret and without much attention to the public’s input is becoming less as a way of drawing mass, particularly when more people have access to technology that allows them to show an interest in maps and in redistricting,” Crayton said. “I think what we’re likely to see is a stronger public push.”