2 days ago
High court upholds House redistricting plan
The state's highest court rejected an appeal from critics that the Republican-led redistricting of the New Hampshire House of Representatives was so politically drawn that it should be deemed unconstitutional.
In its unanimous 4-0 ruling the New Hampshire Supreme Court decided the maps for the 400 seats approved and signed into law in 2022 met the 'rational basis' test that courts hold for such legislative acts.
A group of 10 residents had brought the appeal that alleged the approved map had failed to provide enough towns and city wards with their own representation.
They had introduced a rival plan from a nonpartisan organization known as 'Map-A-Thon' that came up with a proposal that gave 15 more communities and city wards their own state rep compared to the House plan.
The justices noted that any lawsuit against redistricting faces a high bar because it's the actions of a separate and independent branch of government.
'This means that we will not hold the redistricting statute to be unconstitutional unless a clear and substantial conflict exists between it and the Constitution,' justices wrote.
'It also means that when doubts exist as to the constitutionality of a statute, those doubts must be resolved in favor of its constitutionality.'
Attorney General John Formella's legal team had countered that the redistricting plan (HB 50) was a 'political decision to be made by the Legislature based on policy considerations.'
Redistricting has favored GOP
State prosecutors maintained for the court to strike the plan down, justices would have to act as lawmakers and the court agreed with that logic.
'The plaintiffs have not persuaded us that the trade-offs the Legislature made in enacting RSA 662:5 (redistricting law) were unreasonable,' the justices wrote.
'Accordingly, we conclude that the plaintiffs have not met their burden of demonstrating that the Legislature had no rational or legitimate basis for enacting RSA 662:5.'
Formella issued a statement praising the decision and thanking his legal team for its defense.
'Today's decision reaffirms the court's prior precedent recognizing the Legislature's broad discretion in the area of redistricting and recognizes that the Legislature must balance complex constitutional requirements when determining the most appropriate map,' Formella said.
'We are delighted that the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding that the Legislature acted within its constitutional authority …'
In November, the high court upheld redistricting maps for the 24-person state Senate and the five-person Executive Council.
Since all three maps were approved, Republicans have held onto the ruling majorities in the Legislature and on the council.
In 2022, Democratic Party critics noted that their candidates for Executive Council got the most votes across the state, but they won only one of the five seats.
That's because the redistricting made four of those council districts more Republican-leaning while the fifth became much more Democratic.
The fifth Supreme Court justice, Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi, is on administrative leave while she fights charges she illegally interfered in a criminal investigation into her husband, State Ports and Harbors Director Geno Marconi.
klandrigan@
