2020 Georgia Code
Title 28 - General Assembly
Chapter 2 - Apportionment of House of Representatives and Senate; Qualifications of Members
- For article, "Walking the Line: Modern Gerrymandering and Partisanship," see 52 Ga. L. Rev. 1011 (2018). For article, "The First Amendment Case Against Partisan Gerrymandering," see 52 Ga. L. Rev. 1042 (2018). For article, "The History of Redistricting in Georgia," see 52 Ga. L. Rev. 1060 (2018). For article, "Constitutional Preservation and the Judicial Review of Partisan Gerrymanders," see 52 Ga. L. Rev. 1108 (2018). For article, "Partisan Gerrymandering and the Constitutionalization of Statistics," see 68 Emory L.J. 979 (2019).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Permissible variance in apportionment.
- A mathematical formula fixing a maximum variance by which the population of a district may differ from the average district population is not possible, but a variance of more than 15 percent would be difficult, if not impossible, to justify. The court will base any test as to the reasonableness of variances on the departure figure of 15 percent. This does not mean a deliberate built-in variance of this degree but a good faith effort to meet the average with departure only where necessary to afford individual representation to as many counties as possible. Toombs v. Fortson, 241 F. Supp. 65 (N.D. Ga. 1965), aff'd, 384 U.S. 210, 86 S. Ct. 1464, 16 L. Ed. 2d 482 (1966).
Judicial review of legislative apportionment.
- The proper judicial approach is to ascertain whether, under the particular circumstances existing in the individual state whose legislative apportionment is at issue, there has been a faithful adherence to a plan of population-based representation, with such minor deviations only as may occur in recognizing certain factors that are free from any taint of arbitrariness or discrimination. Toombs v. Fortson, 241 F. Supp. 65 (N.D. Ga. 1965), aff'd, 384 U.S. 210, 86 S. Ct. 1464, 16 L. Ed. 2d 482 (1966).
