{"id":83411,"date":"2022-03-25T01:30:00","date_gmt":"2022-03-25T09:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.juneauempire.com\/news\/alaska-supreme-court-says-redistricting-board-acted-unconstitutionally\/"},"modified":"2022-03-25T01:30:00","modified_gmt":"2022-03-25T09:30:00","slug":"alaska-supreme-court-says-redistricting-board-acted-unconstitutionally","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.juneauempire.com\/news\/alaska-supreme-court-says-redistricting-board-acted-unconstitutionally\/","title":{"rendered":"Alaska Supreme Court says redistricting board acted unconstitutionally"},"content":{"rendered":"
The Alaska Supreme Court ruled Friday the Alaska Redistricting Board committed unconstitutional political gerrymandering in the pairing of electoral districts in Anchorage.<\/p>\n
The case combined four different lawsuits against the Redistricting Board from residents of East Anchorage; the City of Skagway; the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the City of Valdez and Calista Corp., an Alaska Native corporation.<\/p>\n
In February, Anchorage Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews ruled in favor of the Anchorage residents and the city of Skagway but dismissed the other two suits. The Court upheld most of the findings of Matthews’ findings but reversed some of the court’s orders based on different findings.<\/p>\n
The board came under fire in November for its decision to pair an Alaska House of Representatives district in East Anchorage with an adjoining district in nearby Eagle River for a single Senate district. The districts are contiguous, but the boundaries touch only in an undeveloped area and plaintiffs were able to successfully argue the two areas are not socially integrated.<\/p>\n
“We AFFIRM the superior court’s determination that the Board’s Senate K pairing of house districts constituted an unconstitutional political gerrymander violating equal protection under the Alaska Constitution,” the court wrote<\/a>. “We therefore AFFIRM the superior court’s remand to the Board to correct the constitutional error.”<\/p>\n The Supreme Court upheld Matthews ruling the board violated the state constitution’s equal protection clause and sought to unfairly elevate the electoral power of Eagle River.<\/p>\n