TEXAS REDISTRICTING

Updates and News about the 2011 Redistricting Cycle in the Lone Star State. This website's goal is to try to make sure the redistricting process is as transparent and accessible as possible to the public. Hopefully, it will be of some use to a broad range of interested parties, both lawyers and non-lawyers. Have questions, comments, suggestions, additional content, or a redistricting joke (or two)? Feel free to contact me: Michael Li michael.li@mlilaw.com 214.821.8473. You also can follow me on Twitter: @mcpli

One of the more extraordinary parts of yesterday’s status conference was an extended exchange between the panel and Assistant Attorney General David Mattax, the state’s lead attorney at the hearing.

It’s illustrative of just how far the state’s priorities have shifted.

To start with, Mattax stressed again and again, his voice rising at times, that these were just interim maps and did not need to be perfect.  That drew a quick comment from a stone-faced Judge Rodriguez that, “That’s what we thought the last time.”

When Joe Nixon, the lawyer for Congressman Joe Barton, questioned whether the state had the authority to agree to a map other than the one passed by the Texas Legislature, Mattax again sharply drew the distinction between interim and permanent maps.

When asked by Judge Rodriguez whether that meant the state was prepared to say that it wouldn’t appeal any new interim map to the Supreme Court, Mattax said that - as long as the changes were in areas of legitimate dispute - the state was prepared not to object, with the understanding that these were only interim maps. 

If that weren’t enough, the state also seemed prepared to make significant concessions on its prior insistence about strong deference to its maps - right down to a willingness to allow redistricting plaintiffs to draw maps in areas where the state agreed there was a serious dispute. It remains to be seen whether the parties can even agree on even that much.  But certainly there are areas of the state like Hildalgo County - where, as Judge Smith noted yesterday, all three judges have expressed concerns about the state’s redrawing of HD 41 - where it looks like the state is willing to give up the fight for its map.

It’s not clear why the state’s position has shifted so radically.  Theories range from pressure to keep Texas relevant to the GOP presidential nomination to concerns about the ruling that the D.C. court might issue to worries of incumbent legislators about a split primary.  Or maybe it’s just that Texas Republicans, faced with few good options, are figuring that they can always try redistricting again in January 2013.