WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court ended the five-year fight over Colorado's congressional district maps Monday, ruling that a group of citizens had no right to sue to reverse a redistricting plan imposed by a judge in 2002.

Democrats cheered the decision, saying that it preserves a system that has meant healthy competition. But the Republican lawyers behind the case expressed disappointment, saying it sets a bad precedent that leaves their clients disenfranchised.

Barring surprises, both sides said the ruling appears to end political and legal skirmishes that had lingered halfway into the 10-year life of the redistricting plan.

"If there's another (legal) front, I haven't thought of it and I'm not going to be involved in it," said Republican attorney John Zakhem, whose firm both argued and financed the case.

State Republican Party officials declined to comment when asked if they would pursue more legal challenges, but Zakhem said it is time to move on.

Four citizens had sued to overturn a redistricting plan imposed by a judge in 2002, saying the U.S. Constitution required redistricting to be decided by legislators, not courts.

Partisan process

Deciding a lower-court appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the plaintiffs needed more than an "undifferentiated, generalized grievance about the conduct of government" to have the legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

Redistricting, required after each census, is meant to ensure that each of a state's congressional districts has roughly the same number of voters. It can be a confusing, partisan process that has a profound effect on the way a state is governed.

In Colorado's case, it was one factor that helped switch the state congressional delegation from a 4-2 Republican majority in 2000 to a 4-3 Democratic majority after the 2006 elections.

After the 2000 U.S. census, fast-growing Colorado won a seventh congressional district. In 2001, the state legislature began trying to write new maps, but Republicans and Democrats deadlocked.

A compromise never came, and there was finger-pointing from both sides as the issue got dropped into the lap of Denver District Court Judge John W. Coughlin.

Coughlin ordered the two parties to present proposed maps, and in January 2002, he approved a Democrat-backed plan. It included the oddly shaped 7th District wrapping around Denver's northern and western suburbs with near-equal split of Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters.

Republican Bob Beauprez eked out a 121-vote win in 2002, but after the elections the GOP-led state legislature attempted to impose a new, more favorable map.

One per decade

Ken Salazar, the state attorney general at the time, joined by Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs, sued to block it, arguing that the state constitution allowed only one redistricting per decade - whether imposed by a judge or the state legislature. Their suit ultimately prevailed.

Meanwhile, the Colorado skirmish added to the complicated, sometimes bizarre redistricting fights happening all over the country. In Texas, for example, some Democratic legislators literally went into hiding and fled the state in hopes of denying Republicans the quorum they needed to pass a GOP-friendly redistricting map.

Colorado's fight bounced from one court to the next and, including Monday's decision, the net result is a map that gives Democrats more territory where they can compete despite the GOP's statewide voter registration advantage.

Republican attorney Zakhem and his law partner Brett Lilly said Monday's decision practically guaranteed another protracted legal fight during the next round of redistricting, likely in 2011 or 2012.

But Udall and Perlmutter disagree, saying five years of court rulings give lawmakers more incentive to reach compromise to avoid a judge's mandate.

"I'd rather both parties spend our resources and our time next go around battling over ideas and philosophies, and not in the courts," Udall said.

Redistricting, blow by blow

• Jan. 25, 2002: District Judge John Coughlin redraws the congressional map after lawmakers can't agree on one. He selects the map proposed by Democrats, stunning Republicans who said the plan would put their party at a disadvantage.

• Feb. 26, 2002: Colorado Supreme Court upholds map after GOP challenge.

• May 7, 2003: House and Senate give final OK to a Republican-drawn congressional district map. Republicans said they were merely fulfilling the constitutional obligation of the legislature to draw a congressional map.

• May 9, 2003: Gov. Bill Owens signs redistricting plan into law.

• May 14, 2003: Attorney General Ken Salazar files lawsuit in state Supreme Court to stop the plan.

• Dec. 1, 2003: The Colorado Supreme Court throws out GOP map and agrees to keep the judge-approved map in place.

• July 28, 2005: A three-judge panel rejects the last piece of a lawsuit filed by three Republicans and a Democrat unhappy with how Colorado's seven congressional districts were drawn.

• Feb. 21, 2006: U.S. Supreme Court rules that the three-judge panel erred by tossing out the challenge.

• Aug. 15, 2006: Federal judges rule against the four challengers to the congressional district map, saying the state Supreme Court ruling had resolved the issue.

• March 5, 2007: The high court rules that the challengers were not entitled to sue in an effort to overturn the current map.

sprengelmeyerm@shns.com or 202-408-2729

Back to Top