Supreme Court of the United States ------
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No. 13-1314 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE, APPELLANT v. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, ET AL. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA --------------------------------- --------------------------------- BRIEF FOR LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARIZONA, INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC., ARIZONA ADVOCACY NETWORK, DENNIS M. BURKE, AND BART TURNER AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING APPELLEES --------------------------------- --------------------------------- TIMOTHY M. HOGAN JOSEPH R. PALMORE ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW Counsel of Record IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST DEANNE E. MAYNARD 202 E. McDowell Rd., MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP Suite 153 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Phoenix, AZ 85004 Washington, DC 20006 (520) 529-1798 (202) 887-6940 [email protected] [email protected] ANDREW S. GORDON JOE P. SPARKS MELISSA A. SOLIZ THE SPARKS LAW FIRM, P.C. SHELLEY TOLMAN 7503 First St. COPPERSMITH BROCKELMAN Scottsdale, AZ 85251 2800 N. Central Ave., (480) 949-1339 Suite 1200 [email protected] Phoenix, AZ 85004 (602) 381-5460 [email protected] JANUARY 23, 2015 ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................... iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............................ 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGU- MENT .................................................................. 4 ARGUMENT ........................................................... 5 I. FROM THE BEGINNING, THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA HAVE RESERVED LAW- MAKING POWER FOR THEMSELVES .... 5 A. The Tools Of Direct Democracy Were Central To The Arizona Constitution At The Time Of Its Adoption ................. 6 1. State Constitutional Convention of 1910 ................................................... 6 2. Congress and President Taft............ 12 B. The Arizona Constitution’s Terms And Structure Expressly Reserve Lawmak- ing Power For The People ..................... 14 II. FROM THE BEGINNING, THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA HAVE DIRECTLY ENACTED MEASURES TO REGULATE ELECTIONS ... 17 A. The Arizona Constitution As Originally Adopted By The People Regulated Elections ................................................ 18 B. The People Of Arizona Have Repeatedly Amended Their Constitution To Regu- late Elections ......................................... 19 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued Page C. The People Of Arizona Have Repeated- ly Enacted Statutes To Regulate Elec- tions........................................................ 21 III. THE INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION IS JUST A RECENT EX- AMPLE OF A VOTER-INITIATED AND APPROVED ELECTION REFORM IN ARIZONA ..................................................... 22 A. Before Enactment Of Proposition 106, The Arizona Legislature Failed To Ful- fill Its Redistricting Responsibilities .... 23 B. Arizonans Enacted Proposition 106 To Address Failures In Redistricting By The Legislature ..................................... 24 1. Proposition 106 had bipartisan sup- port .................................................... 26 2. Arizona’s Indian Tribes supported Proposition 106 ................................. 28 C. The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Has Performed Better Than The Legislature ..................................... 29 CONCLUSION ....................................................... 31 APPENDIX A: Provisions From Arizona Con- stitution Regulating Elections ................................ 1a APPENDIX B: Statutes Regulating Elections Passed or Amended by Initiative .......................... 38a iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES Allen v. State, 130 P. 1114 (Ariz. 1913) ...................... 16 Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2247 (2013) ....................................... 21, 22 Arizonans for Fair Representation v. Syming- ton, 828 F. Supp. 684 (D. Ariz. 1992) ...................... 28 Choate v. Trapp, 224 U.S. 665 (1912) ........................ 28 Goddard v. Babbitt, 536 F. Supp. 538 (D. Ariz. 1982) ........................................................................ 24 Harrison v. Laveen, 196 P.2d 456 (Ariz. 1948) .......... 29 Home Builders Ass’n of Cent. Ariz., Inc. v. Riddel, 510 P.2d 376 (Ariz. 1973) ........................... 16 McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819) ....................................................................... 17 NLRB v. Noel Canning, 134 S. Ct. 2550 (2014) ........ 17 Pacific States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118 (1912) .......................................................... 9 Porter v. Hall, 271 P. 411 (Ariz. 1928) ........................ 29 Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006) ....................... 21 Queen Creek Land & Cattle Corp. v. Yavapai Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 501 P.2d 391 (Ariz. 1972) ........................................................................ 15 Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Ac- tion, 134 S. Ct. 1623 (2014) ...................................... 4 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page Tilson v. Mofford, 737 P.2d 1367 (Ariz. 1987) ............ 16 Winkle v. City of Tucson, 949 P.2d 502 (Ariz. 1997) ........................................................................ 15 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Ariz. Const. art. II, § 21 ............................................................... 18 art. III ...................................................................... 14 art. IV ...................................................................... 15 art. IV, pt. 1, § 1 ................................................. 15, 16 art. IV, pt. 2, § 1 ............................... 15, 24, 25, 26, 29 art. VII, § 3 ........................................................ 19, 20 art. VII, § 7 .............................................................. 18 art. VII, § 10 ...................................................... 18, 20 art. VII, § 17 ............................................................ 20 art. XXI, § 1 ............................................................. 19 art. XXI, § 2 ............................................................. 19 art. XXII, § 12 .......................................................... 18 art. XXII, § 14 .......................................................... 15 art. XXII, § 18 .......................................................... 20 U.S. Const. art. I, § 8 .................................................................. 28 art. IV, § 3 ................................................................ 28 art. IV, § 4 ............................................................ 8, 11 v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page STATUTES Act of June 20, 1910, 36 Stat. 557 ................... 6, 12, 13 Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-112 ............................................. 21 Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-166 ............................................. 22 H.R. 2698, 44th Leg., 1st Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 1999) (codified at Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-1103) ......... 25 Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, 43 Stat. 253 ............. 29 Voting Rights Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-110, 79 Stat. 437 ............................................................. 29 LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS 47 Cong. Rec. 1499 (1911) .................................... 12, 13 47 Cong. Rec. 1501 (1911) .......................................... 12 47 Cong. Rec. 1506 (1911) .......................................... 13 47 Cong. Rec. 1529 (1911) .......................................... 12 47 Cong. Rec. 3742 (1911) .......................................... 12 47 Cong. Rec. 4121 (1911) .......................................... 12 47 Cong. Rec. 4230 (1911) .......................................... 13 vi TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page OTHER AUTHORITIES 2000 Ballot Propositions: Proposition 106 (Nov. 7, 2000), available at http://www.azsos.gov/ election/2000/info/pubpamphlet/english/prop106. pdf ............................................................................ 27 Barbara Norrander & Jay Wendland, Redis- tricting in Arizona, in Reapportionment and Redistricting in the West 177 (Gary Moncrief ed., 2011) ..................................................... 23, 24, 26 Bruce E. Cain, Redistricting Commissions: A Better Political Buffer?, 121 Yale L.J. 1808 (2012) ....................................................................... 23 David K. Pauole, Race, Politics & (In)Equality: Proposition 106 Alters the Face and Rules of Redistricting in Arizona, 33 Ariz. St. L.J. 1219 (2001) .............................................................. 25 John D. Leshy, The Arizona State Constitution (2d ed. 2013) .................................................... passim Nicholas Stephanopoulos, Reforming Redis- tricting: Why Popular Initiatives to Establish Redistricting Commissions Succeed or Fail, 23 J.L. & Pol. 331 (2007) ........................................ 30 Paul F. Eckstein, The Debate Over Direct De- mocracy at the Arizona Constitutional Con- vention, Arizona Attorney, Feb. 2012 ......... 4, 7, 8, 11 Peter Miller & Bernard Grofman, Redistricting Commissions in the Western United States, 3 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 637 (2013) ................................ 30 vii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page Rose Mofford, Ariz. Sec’y of State, 1982 Publicity