Connecticut Redistricting Cases:  the 1990s
 

Fonfara v. Reapportionment Commission, 222 Conn. 166, 610 A.2d 153 (1992)

Plaintiffs challenged the redistricting plan by claiming that it violates the state constitution's "town integrity principle." The constitution prohibits towns from being divided by the redistricting plan for the House of Representatives "except for the purpose of forming assembly districts wholly within the town." They asked the state Supreme Court to review and correct the plan. The court said that the principal issue was whether it should overturn a plan without a prima facie showing that the plan failed to reconcile the federal constitutional principle of one person, one vote and the state constitutional principle of town integrity. The court held that the constitution does not give it superlegislative powers to write a new plan. Instead, its scope of review is limited to determining whether the plan conforms to federal and state constitutional mandates. Second, it held that the challengers did not demonstrate that towns were divided for reasons other than to meet the federal equal population requirement.


 State Contacts
 
Michael Nauer
Executive Director 
Joint Committee on Legislative Management 
Room 5100, Legislative Office Building 
Hartford, CT 06106 
860/240-0100 voice 
860/240-8881 fax 
Dan Duffy 
Principal Analyst 
Office of Legislative Research 
Room 5300, Legislative Office Building 
Hartford, CT 06106 
860/240-8400 voice 
860/240-8881 fax 
dan.duffy@po.state.ct.us