 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Arizona Minority Coalition For Fair Redistricting v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission10/21/2005
itive legislative districts. The Coalition contended that its own alternative plan accomplished all of the Section 1(14) goals better than the Commission's plan. The Coalition sought a writ of mandamus and declaratory or injunctive relief.
On March 14, 2002, a separate action challenging the congressional plan was filed, alleging the Commission violated Article 4, Part 2, Section 1(14), Article 2, Sections 4 and 13, and Article 20, Section 7, by adopting a plan that discriminated on the basis of race. The superior court consolidated the cases on March 19, 2002. Arizonans for Fair and Legal Redistricting ("AFLR"), Mohave County, the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe and the cities of Lake Havasu, Flagstaff, and Kingman intervened to protect their respective interests.
During the course of the litigation, the Navajo Nation and the Commission stipulated to a statement of facts and filed cross-motions for summary judgment concerning the former's challenge to the congressional plan. Specifically, the Navajo Nation contested the plan because it removed the Hopi Tribe, which is completely surrounded by the Navajo Nation, from congressional district 1, the district in which the Navajo Nation was placed, and put the Hopi Tribe in adjoining district 2. The Commission achieved this by using a narrow, 103-mile serpentine corridor that partially follows the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon to connect the Hopi Tribe with the rest of district 2. Forty-two Navajo citizens reside within that corridor and were therefore separated from district 1. The Navajo Nation alleged that the Commission violated Article 4, Part 2, Section 1(14) by carving out a community residing within district 1 to place it within district
2. The trial court granted the Commission's motion and denied the Navajo Nation's motion, ruling that the constitution allows the Commission flexibility in applying the enumerated criteria as long as its decisions have a basis. The Navajo Nation appeals this ruling.
Following the completion of discovery, a trial to the court took place in late 2003 concerning the challenges to the legislative plan, and the court issued a ruling in January 2004. In detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law, the court found that the final legislative plan did not sufficiently favor competitive districts and therefore enjoined use of the plan. It also ruled that the new constitutional provisions were not "self-executing," and consequently directed the Commission to formulate various definitions and standards. The Commission, AFLR, and thirteen individual intervenors appeal this ruling. However, in compliance with the court's order, the Commission prepared a new legislative plan on April 12, 2004, which the court approved on April 16. The Commission and AFLR then amended their notices of appeal to include an appeal from the latter order. The City of Kingman and Mohave County appeal the order approving the revised plan.
We have jurisdiction over these matters pursuant to Article 6, Section 9, of the Arizona Constitution, and Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") sections 12-120.21(A)(1) (2003) and 12-2101(B) (2003).
STANDARD OF REVIEW
In reviewing the court's rulings in the legislative redistricting case, we will not set aside the trial court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 52(a); Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa County, 207 Ariz. 553, 558, 18, 88 P.3d 1165, 1170 (App. 2004). "A finding is clearly erroneous if no reasonable evidence supports it." In re B.S., 205 Ariz. 611, 614, 5, 74 P.3d 285, 288 (App. 2003). However, we are not bound by the court's conclusions of law and draw our own legal conclusions
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|