The Aftermath of In Re 2001 Redistricting Cases: The Need for a New Constitutional Scheme for Legislative Redistricting in Alaska
Gordon Scott Harrison
Abstract
Open-access reader
Gordon Scott Harrison
Abstract
Open-access reader
In this Comment, the former executive director of the Alaska Redistricting Board argues that the proper forum for redistricting in Alaska is the state legislature, with procedural safeguards to ensure the minority party a voice.This Comment describes the history of redistricting and the process by which the 2000 districts were formulated.This Comment analyzes the process and critiques its shortfalls; it concludes that a change in redistricting policy is needed to avoid litigation and provide for more equitable redistricting to occur. I.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In this Comment, the former executive director of the Alaska Redistricting Board argues that the proper forum for redistricting in Alaska is the state legislature, with procedural safeguards to ensure the minority party a voice.This Comment describes the history of redistricting and the process by which the 2000 districts were formulated.This Comment analyzes the process and critiques its shortfalls; it concludes that a change in redistricting policy is needed to avoid litigation and provide for more equitable redistricting to occur. I.
Key concepts: Redistricting, Legislature, State (computer science), Political science, Law, Public administration, Law and economics, Sociology