►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hello,
everyone
I
see,
some
of
you
are
still
connecting
to
audio,
but
I'm
glad
you've
decided
to
join
us
for
what
is
our
penultimate
office
hours
of
2021,
so
we
are
not
having
another
office
hours
that
would
be
the
week
of
thanksgiving
and
then
we'll
have
one
in
december.
So
this
is
really
you
know,
2021
winding
down,
and
so
I'm
I'm
mandy
zach
for
those
who
don't
know.
I
work
in
the
elections
and
redistricting
program
here
at
ncsl
and
I
am
pleased
to
introduce
this
office
hours
guest.
We
have
ted
booth
with
us
today.
A
He
is
general
counsel
to
the
mississippi
legislative
peer
committee
and
he
is
here
to
provide
a
brief
history
of
redistricting
and
if
any
of
you
were
at
the
legislative
summit,
this
is
a
bit
of
a
refreeze,
but
we
also
an
opportunity
to
ask
ted
questions,
and
then
we
have
a
couple
updates
from
our
own
team
as
well.
So
with
that
ted,
why
don't
you
take
it
away?.
B
B
Okay,
this
is
a
map
of
the
senate
plan
for
the
state
of
mississippi
acid
appeared
in
the
mississippi
state
statistical
register
for
1960..
This
was
the
plan
that
was
in
force,
in
effect
in
mississippi,
on
the
eve
of
the
great
redistricting
cases
of
the
early
1960s,
and
take
a
look
at
the
plan
for
a
minute.
There's
there's
a
lot
in
this
plan
to
recommend
it.
B
This
is
a
election
administrator's
dream,
no
split
precincts,
no
split
counties,
no
split
municipalities.
We've
got
a
contiguity
issue
down
in
southwest
mississippi.
If
you
look
at
district
six,
it's
comprised
of
two
counties
that
don't
even
touch,
but
we
didn't
worry
a
whole
lot
about
that.
But
this
problem
has
some
flaws.
That
would
be
absolutely
fatal
under
current
redistricting
law
and
if
you
begin
down
in
the
southwest
corner
of
the
state
along
the
mississippi
river,
I'm
going
to
direct
you
up
to
district
12,
which
is
the
district
that
includes
warren
county.
B
Where
vicksburg
is,
you
can
see
right
in
the
bend
of
the
river,
almost
halfway
up
or
out
of
about
40
percent
of
the
way
up
the
river?
That
is
where
the
city
of
vicksburg
is
located.
If
you
proceeded
due
east
from
there,
you
would
find
out
that
hinds
county
is
also
in
district
12..
Hinds
county
is
the
home
of
the
city
of
jackson.
B
However,
these
two
counties
these
were
in
these
were
multi-member
districts
contained
only
three
senators,
so
that
would
have
been
about
six
point:
two
percent
of
the
total
representation
in
the
senate.
Now,
if
he
went
further
up
the
river
in
miss
along
the
river,
you
would
come
to
this
little
bitty
sand,
spit
of
a
county
called
issaquena
county
that
in
1960
contained
3
800
folks,
and
if
you
proceeded
due
east
of
issaqueena
county,
you
would
see
sharkey
county
which
contained
about
7
000
people
between
them.
B
They
had
about
11
000
residents,
they
together
elected
a
senate
senator
and
you
would
immediately
say
under
what
we
understand
the
law
to
be
right.
Now
that
can't
be
that's
going
to
be
a
violation
of
one
person.
One
vote.
Well,
it's
important
for
us
to
remember
that
the
concept
of
one
person,
one
vote,
just
like
many
of
the
concepts
we
are
accustomed
to
working
with
under
the
voting
rights
act,
were
simply
not
part
of
our
legal
understanding
in
1960.
B
B
One
of
them
is
the
great
influx
of
immigrants
who
came
into
this
country
in
the
late
19th
century
and
early
20th
century
many
from
eastern
europe
and
southern
europe.
They
settled
in
the
big
cities.
Their
presence
in
the
population
represented
something
of
a
threat
to
old
elites
in
the
state
people
from
small
towns
and
rural
areas
who
perhaps
dominated
legislatures.
Certainly
they
did
in
my
state
who
were
a
little
concerned
that
if
we
did
any
kind
of
balancing
of
populations
that
these
old
interests
would
eventually
lose
their
control.
B
Not
only
did
you
have
concerns
about
immigration,
there
was
a
lot
of
intra
state
movement.
My
hometown
of
jackson,
mississippi
was
a
tiny
little
town
of
about
10
000
people
in
1910.
By
1960
it
had
grown
fifteen
fold.
Large
numbers
of
people
had
moved
to
the
cities
to
seek
better
opportunity,
new
employment.
B
Certainly
in
the
years
after
world
war
ii,
the
gi
bill
drew
all
kinds
of
educated
people
to
the
cities
to
take
up
employment
in
government
and
finance,
and
things
like
that.
They
were
pulling
people
away
from
the
rural
areas
and
the
rural
areas.
Once
again,
even
in
places
where
immigration
was
not
a
factor
were
threatened
by
the
move
toward
the
cities.
B
Now,
here's
some
interesting
statistics
on
the
eve
of
the
great
redistricting
cases
of
the
1960s
alabama
had
not
redistricted
or
done
a
change
in
their
apportionment
since
1900.,
louisiana,
1921,
tennessee,
1901,
mississippi,
1915,
and
just
to
prove
that
this
wasn't
an
illness
peculiar
to
southerners
indiana
1915,
iowa,
1927
and
delaware.
1897.,
delaware
and
mississippi
were
very
unusual
in
that
we
not
only
didn't
reapportion.
B
We
actually
put
our
apportionments
in
our
constitution,
which
made
it
extremely
difficult
for
anyone
to
change
those.
You
might
ask
the
question.
Okay,
perhaps
the
legislatures
wouldn't
step
into
the
breach,
wouldn't
make
a
change.
What
about
the
courts?
We
know
the
courts
are
the
place.
People
have
gone
over
the
years
to
seek
redress
when
imbalances
have
existed
well,
the
courts
were
taking
pretty
much
a
hands-off
attitude
toward
redistricting
and
state
legislative
redistricting.
B
You'll
find
lots
of
opinions
from
the
courts
back
then,
taking
the
position
that
separation
of
powers
prohibited
courts
from
getting
involved
in
a
redistricting
or
reapportionment
matter.
This
is
a
legislative
issue.
They
said
it
is
not
for
the
courts.
There
are
other
decisions
which
use
this
rather
nebulous
term
that
when
you
file
a
court
case
and
seek
an
injunction,
the
court
would
determine
that
there
was
quote
no
equity
on
the
face
of
the
bill.
B
B
Now
there
were
other
decisions
where
the
courts
in
some
states
took
taking
the
position
that
well
these
there
is
no
separation
of
powers
issue.
These
cases
are
justiciable,
however.
You're
asking
for
equitable
remedies
such
as
an
injunction
and
judges
and
equity
courts,
have
always
had
the
power
to
balance
the
equities
so
to
speak.
Consider
the
public
interest
and
courts
would
look
at
these
particular
situations
and
say
we
don't
really
know
how
we
would
fashion
a
remedy
to
address
these
problems
that
people
have
asserted
in
their
complaints.
B
Perhaps
the
most
we
could
do
is
say
is
strike
down,
say
a
legislative
reapportionment
or
a
congressional
redistricting,
and
tell
people
you're
going
to
have
to
apply
the
one
that
immediately
preceded
it.
Well,
the
heavens
think
about
that.
If
you
struck
down
a
1915
plan
in
mississippi
in
1960,
what
are
you
going
to
be
telling
them
to
do?
Go
back
to
the
plan
they
had
in
1910?
B
B
There
were
several
cases
involving
congressional
redistricting
in
the
1930s
and
perhaps
most
noteworthy
was
broome
against
wood,
which
is
a
case
that
came
out
of
mississippi,
in
which
several
people,
mostly
living
in
my
heart
of
the
state
in
central,
mississippi
and
jackson,
challenged
the
legislature's
drawing
of
the
then
seven
congressional
districts
in
the
state
of
mississippi.
We
had
a
terrible
imbalance.
Some
pop
some
districts
had
as
many
as
a
half
a
million
folks
in
them
and
some
had
only
around
230
000.
This
was
brought
before
three-judge
county
and
the
petitioners
court
and
the
the
judges.
B
The
matter
was
appealed
to
the
supreme
court
and
in
a
nine
to
nothing
decision,
the
supreme
court
reversed
five
members
concluded
that,
when
we're
dealing
with
congressional
redistricting,
it
is
ultimately
to
the
the
job
of
congress
and
to
the
state
legislatures
to
make
decisions
in
these
areas.
The
court
simply
doesn't
have
jurisdiction.
B
B
It's
not
clear
as
to
exactly
what
these
four
judges
meant,
but
we'll
be
talking
a
little
later
about
the
cold
grove
case
in
which
justice
frankfurter
told
us
what
he
thought.
The
judges
meant
in
this
particular
case.
No
now,
while
courts
are
stepping
back
from
redistricting
courts,
particularly
federal
courts
are
becoming
greatly
involved
in
litigation
involving
economic
rights
and,
in
some
cases,
personal
liberties.
In
this
country.
B
For
years
and
years
and
years,
it
was
assumed
that
if
you
had
an
issue
regarding
rights,
property
rights,
personal
liberties,
the
state
courts
would
be
the
place
where
these
things
would
be
litigated
well
beginning.
In
the
first
decade
of
the
20th
century,
the
federal
courts
became
greatly
involved
in
these
particular
matters.
All
of
you
all
who
went
to
law
school.
B
The
courts
were
greatly
con
criticized
for
taking
these
positions
and
one
of
the
great
critics
of
the
positions
that
these
activist
positions
was
none
other
than
felix
frankfurter,
who
became
a
very,
very
important
voice
in
cases
involving
reapportionment
and
redistricting
by
the
1940s.
B
It's
important
to
note,
though,
that
even
during
the
lochner
era
that
has
been
associated
most
often
with
economic
liberties
litigation,
there
were
many
cases
in
which
the
court
became
involved
in
issues
of
personal
liberty.
Some
of
the
earliest
first
amendment
free
exercise
cases
some
of
the
earliest
free
speech
cases
came
out
during
the
1920s
cases
like
meyer
against
nebraska,
whitney
versus
california
appears
against
society,
as
sisters
were
all
cases
in
which
the
supreme
court
struck
down
state
statutes
as
violating
individual
rights.
B
Now,
by
the
time
of
the
new
deal,
as
we
remember
from
your
from
history,
if
not
from
from
law
school,
there
was
great
consideration,
or
rather
great
criticism
of
the
court
for
being
taking
such
an
active
position
in
in
litigation
and
many
people
criticize
them.
The
courts
should
be
more
restrained.
B
They
shouldn't
get
involved
in
resolving
what
are
policy
questions
that
should
land
in
the
lapse
of
the
legislature
and
after
the
court
packing
plan
and
and
after
some
major
major
sea
changes
in
doctrine
on
the
supreme
court
decisions
began
came
to
come
out
a
little
differently.
There
were.
We
saw
fewer
and
fewer
cases,
defending
property
rights
under
broad
doctrines,
such
as
freedom
of
contract
and,
in
a
very
important
case,
the
united
states
against
caroline
products.
B
It's
amazing
how
such
homely
subjects
could
become
a
wellspring
of
such
important
law.
Caroline
products
was
involved
in
production
of
skim
milk
and,
in
this
case,
justice
stone
soon
to
be
chief
justice.
Stone
wrote
an
opinion
in
which
he
pretty
much
concluded
for
the
entire
all,
but
eight
members
of
the
court
that,
when
we're
looking
at
economic
regulations,
what
we're
going
to
look
to
one
we're
going
to
conclude
that
a
statute,
allegedly
abridging,
an
economic
interest,
is
going
to
be
presumptively
constitutional.
B
This
was
the
seven
seven
justices
were
sitting
on
this
particular
case.
Justice
jackson
was
in
nuremberg,
serving
as
the
chief
prosecutor
for
the
the
united
states
at
the
war
crimes
tribunal,
chief
justice
stone
had
died
and
his
successor,
fred
vinson,
had
not
been
confirmed
at
that
point
in
time.
So
we
had
seven
justices
deciding
this
case.
Justice,
frankfurter
writing
for
himself
and
justices
burton
and
reed
followed
the
what
had
been
the
traditional
court
line.
B
He
concluded
that,
even
though
this
congressional
plan
in
illinois
had
not
been
amended
since
1901,
this
was
simply
not
a
matter
for
the
courts.
He
cited
the
broom
decision
that
the
courts
had
no
jurisdiction
in
this
particular
matter.
This
was
a
matter
of
congress
and
it
was
a
matter
for
state
legislatures,
but
not
for
the
courts.
B
Now,
descending
justice,
black
speaking
for
himself,
justice
douglas
and
justice
murphy,
concluded
that
anytime,
you
had
a
balance
like
this
one
900
000
people
in
one
congressional
district
and
only
200
and
something
thousand
and
another
one.
This
is
clearly
a
violation
of
equal
protection
that
people
are
in
the
smaller
district
and
the
larger
districts
do
not
have
the
same
voice
while
they're
not
using
the
term
one
person
one
vote.
B
The
seventh
justice
justice
rutledge
concurred
in
the
result
of
frankfurter
and
reed
and
burton
he
concluded
that
there
was
no
equity
on
the
face
of
the
bill,
but
what
he
pointed
out
was
that
he
was
not
concluding
the
same
thing
that
frankfurter
did
about
it
that
this
case,
as
far
as
he
was
concerned,
was
justiciable.
B
There
are
principles
out
there
that,
under
which
it
could
be
resolved.
He
was
taking
a
position
much
like
some
state
court.
Judges
did
over
the
years
that,
while
it
may
be
justiciable,
we
have
to
balance
the
equities.
In
this
particular
case.
In
colgrove,
the
plaintiffs
were
asking
for
a
declaratory
judgment,
which
would
be
simply
a
declaration
from
the
court
that
the
plans
were
unconstitutional.
B
He
worried
about
whether
or
not
there
would
be
sufficient
time
before
an
election
cycle
for
the
illinois
general
assembly
to
meet
on
this
particular
matter.
Resolve
it
change
the
districts.
He
questioned
whether
or
not
the
courts
would
have
any
way
of
enforcing
its
decision
so
in
on
the
whole,
he
balanced
the
equities.
The
way
many
equity
judges
will
and
just
concluded
that
this
was
this
particular
matter
was
not
a
matter
in
which
the
court
should
enter.
B
So
he
saw
a
thicket
in
theory.
You
could
go
into
the
thicket
and
get
through
it,
but
this
thicket
was
not
one
he
wanted
to
get
into
now.
In
the
years
immediately,
following
colgrove,
we
saw
several
lower
court
decisions,
treating
frankfurter's
decision
as
controlling
that
these
are
matters
that
are
non-justiciable
on
congressional
matters.
B
There
is
no
jurisdiction,
however,
one
thing
important
to
note
the
majority
in
this
decision
did
conclude.
These
matters
were
justiciable.
It
would
be
for
a
later
date
for
people
to
begin
to
deal
with
justiciability,
the
exit
frankfurter
in
1962
when
the
case
baker
against
carr
came
before
the
court.
B
Baker
against
carr
dealt
with
a
malportion
state
legislature
and
the
petitioners
were
seeking
redress
in
the
federal
courts
and,
in
this
case,
justice,
brennan
writing
for
a
seven-member
majority,
pretty
much
followed
the
line
that
black
and
douglas
and
murphy
would
have
followed
in
their
descending,
followed
in
their
descending
opinion
in
cold
growth.
He
took
the
position
that
yes,
these
are.
There
are
violations
of
equal
protection
and
when
an
equal
protection
right
is
violated,
it
is
ju.
The
the
courts
have
the
power
to
adjudicate.
B
There
are
no
jurisdictional
issues
such
as
the
ones
that
were
asserted
in
broome.
There
are
no
justiciability
issues.
These
cases
can
in
fact
go
to
trial.
The
question
then
becomes
what
principles
will
be
used
to
adjudicate
these?
If
you
read
one
of
the
separate
concurrences
from
justice
clark,
it's
on
justice
clark
almost
resolves
the
case
and
concludes
that
one
person
one
vote
ought
to
be.
The
standard
justice
steward
wrote
that
it
is
important
to
note
that
all
the
court
was
deciding
is.
The
matter
was
justiciable.
B
B
He
once
reminded
he
reminded
us
about
the
thicket
that,
when
you're
engaging
in
redistricting
activities,
you
were
in
making
many
many
political
decisions
that
he
did
not
believe
that
the
courts
were
competent
to
enter
into
remember
justice
frankfurter
built,
a
career
on
a
belief
in
judicial
restraint
that
there
are
matters
that
the
legislature
should
should
handle
that
really
shouldn't
be
handled
by
courts,
even
if
a
court
can
enter
into
the
field
enter
into
the
thicket,
it's
best
for
it
to
stay
out
of
the
thicket.
This
was
a
very
painful
and
costly
decision.
B
Justice
whitaker,
who
had
been
on
the
court
since
the
late
50s,
had
a
major
emotional
breakdown
during
deliberations
on
this
case
and
actually
retired
for
the
court
from
the
court.
Justice
frankfurter,
who
was
passionate
in
dissent,
had
a
major
stroke
after
this
and
was
never
involved
in
deliberations
on
any
of
these
cases
again.
So,
as
I
said,
this
was
a
quite
costly
case
for
all
the
people
who
participated
now
now
these
things
are
justiciable.
B
Now
that
we
are
entering
into
the
thicket
just
what
principles
are
we
going
to
use
as
we
enter
into
the
thicket
to
resolve
these
cases
and
shortly
after
baker?
The
case
of
greg
sanders
comes
before
the
court
and
gray
is
not
a
legislative,
redistricting
or
reapportionment
case.
It
involves
something
that
was
called
the
county
unit
rule
the
state
of
georgia
used
to
determine
who
would
be
a
party
nominee
for
statewide
office.
Apparently,
in
georgia,
popular
vote
didn't
select
nominees
for
statewide
office.
You
had
to
carry
counties
and
county
counties
and
counties.
B
For
the
majority,
justice
douglas
struck
this
down
as
a
violation
of
equal
protection
and
made
some
very
broad
statements
about
how
one
person,
or
in
the
old
days
yes,
he
said
one
man
one
vote
was
the
was
the
rule
of
would
be
the
law
of
the
land
and
accepting
elections
for
the
united
states,
senate
and
elections
for
or
rather
the
operations
of,
the
electoral
college.
B
Reed
harland's
dissent,
he
eviscerates
justice
douglas
justice
douglas,
was
not
one
of
the
great
craftsmen
of
opinions
which
leads
us
to
some
another
question
here.
That
should
interest
all
of
us.
While
we
know
one
person,
one
vote
is
the
principle
that
we
work
with
when
we
are
designing
congressional
districts
and
legislative
districts,
we
have
to
ask
ourselves
a
question:
does
this
principle
have
a
pedigree
and
constitutional
law?
B
Certainly,
if
you
read
the
histories
that
justice
harlan's
dissent
in
this
case,
it's
debatable
as
to
whether
there's
an
historical
basis
for
it,
and
you
have
to
argue
that
one
person
one
vote
and
hears
in
the
terms
equal
protection
of
the
law,
which,
if
you
look
at
the
history
of
the
14th
amendment,
it's
pretty
much
debatable
as
to
whether
something
like
that
was
on
the
minds
of
the
folks
who
crafted
that
amendment.
B
Well,
despite
that,
we
know
in
various
cases
that
came
afterwards
and
reynolds
against
sims
and
westbury
against
sanders.
We
know
that
the
one-person
one-vote
rule
became
the
law
of
the
land
for
allocating
representation
for
congressional
districts,
for
legislative
districts
for
city
council
seats
for
county
supervisor
seats,
but
it's
kind
of
one
of
those
doctrines
that
is
say
has
been
in
search
of
a
pedigree
if
it's
not
in
text,
if
it's
not
in
history,
where
is
its
where
to
to
what
can
we
attribute
its
pedigree?
B
Enter
footnote
4
again
remember
what
we
talked
about
about
the
presumption
of
constitutionality,
perhaps
not
applying
to
statutes
or
regulations
that
impair
the
operations
of
democratic
processes,
and
I
also
mentioned
that
whole
theories
of
constitutional
law
have
been
built
around
this.
Well,
a
very
brilliant
legal
scholar,
one
of
the
most
noteworthy
constitutional
scholars
of
my
lifetime.
B
B
We
have
expanded
the
powers
of
citizens
to
select
senators
that
we
have
been
our
the
whole
trajectory
of
our
constitution
has
been
toward
expanding
participation
in
representative
government
and
that
for
this
principle,
this
principle
can
certainly
validate
the
idea
of
the
concept
of
one
person,
one
vote.
B
So
one
person
one
vote
perhaps
has
a
pedigree,
not
one
that
mr
justice
douglas
thought
about
when
he
was
writing
his
opinion
in
gray,
and
not
one
that
justice
black
may
have
thought
about
when
he
was
descending
in
pell
grove.
But
nonetheless,
a
pedigree
does
exist
for
one
person's
in
one
vote.
Now
one
a
couple
of
thoughts
or
points
on
the
voting
rights
act.
B
Wendy
had
asked
me
to
talk
about
the
vra
and
the
extent
to
which
redistricting
was
contemplated
in
the
original
voting
rights
act
and
the
original
voting
rights
act
dealt
with
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
electoral
process,
but
vote
dilution
issues
were
really
seem
to
have
been
foreign
to
the
text
of
the
original
act
and
in
1969
the
supreme
court
handed
down
a
case
allen
against
board
of
elections,
which
was
a
consolidated.
B
That
was
a
virginia
case
that
was
consolidated
with
a
mississippi
case
in
which
these
jurisdictions,
perhaps
fearing
that
african
americans
would
start
winning
certain
district
elections
at
local
levels,
had
abolished
electoral
districts
for
certain
types
of
positions,
school
board
and
county
and
county
commissions
and
created
an
at-large
election
system
chief
justice.
Warren
writing
for
the
majority
in
this
case
concluded
that
certainly
addressing
vote.
Dilution
type
issues
was
very
much
within
could
fit
within
the
scope
of
the
vra
and
the
vra
becomes
expanded
to
deal
with
this.
A
A
B
B
I
don't
see
it
just
yet.
I
I
really
don't.
I
think
we
saw
the
supreme
court
in
the
last
few
years,
kind
of
tuning
up
and
hearing
justice
frankfurter
about
the
thicket,
keeping
us
out
of
political
gerrymandering
and
partisanship
claims,
but
I
just
don't
see
them
at
this
point
in
time.
B
Curtailing
anything,
I
don't
see
one
person
one
vote
being
under
an
attack.
I've
heard
some
people
suggesting
that
it
might
be,
but
that
is
such
a
well-ingrained
principle
in
in
american
constitutional
law.
I
just
don't
see
it
happening
now,
as
for
section
two
section
two
has
to
live
in
tension
with
equal
protection,
and
we
all
of
us
who
deal
with
section
two
know
that
when
we
are
building
districts
to
comply
with
section
two,
someone
can
argue
that
that
may
constitute
a
racial
gerrymander.
B
So
we
live
with
that
tension
and
have
for
a
long
long
time.
I
think
we'll
continue
to
be
doing
that,
I'm
thinking
so
long
as
we
can
justify
our
efforts
in
drawing
majority
minority
districts
as
being
based
on
data
that
defensible
data
like
election
returns
by
not
using
blanket
standards
for
drawing
districts.
I
think
we're
probably
still
going
to
be
constitutional
and
within
the
vra.
A
Thanks
no
good
to
get
that
perspective,
and
then
I
have
another
question
and
and
maybe
it's
a
little
remedial,
but
it's
for
the
non-attorneys
in
the
audience,
which
is
myself
and
maybe
a
couple
of
other
other
people
use
the
phrase
no
equity.
On
the
face
of
the
bill.
A
couple
of
times
and.
A
B
We
have
yeah
and
an
american
in
american
jurisprudence,
they're
sort
of
like
three
great
systems
of
jurisprudence,
law,
equity
and
admiralty,
and
in
the
federal
courts
they've
all
been
merged.
Whenever
you
bring
a
lawsuit
now
we
never
talk
about
bringing
an
action
at
law,
suited
equity
or
a
libel
at
admiralty.
B
We
call
it
just
a
civil
action,
but
those
of
us
like
me,
who
grew
up
in
a
state
that
still
has
separate
courts
of
equity
and
separate
courts
of
law,
learned
this
arcane
language
that
used
that
it
was
used
for
years
and
years
and
years
and
some
of
this
stuff
still
matters
when
you're
asserting
jurisdiction
in
courts
of
when
you're,
asserting
an
alleged
right
to
an
equitable
remedy
like
an
injunction
and
when
you're
going
after
a
redistricting
plan,
you're,
usually
seeking
injunctive
and
declaratory
relief.
B
You
want
the
court
to
stop
people
from
using
this
and
to
order
them
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
or
to
even
draw
a
plan
themselves,
so
you're
seeking
what
are
called
equitable
remedies
in
order
to
receive
redress.
Now,
when
people
said
there
was
no
equity
on
the
face
of
a
bill,
it
could
mean
many
different
things
years
and
years
and
years
ago
it
often
meant
that
equity
jurisdiction
could
only
extend
to
the
protection
of
certain
types
of
rights,
generally
property
rights,
that
political
rights
simply
weren't,
defensible
in
equity.
B
So
whenever
you
saw
that
that
term
no
equity
on
the
face
of
the
bill,
it
could
mean
that
it
could
also
mean
what
justice
frankfurter
thought.
It
meant
that
it
was
a
requirement
that
there
be
neutral
principles
of
justiciability
that
could
be
used
by
courts
to
decide
a
case
and
determine
which
kind
of
remedy
is
appropriate
and
then
probably
the
most
noteworthy
one.
You
saw
it
from
time
to
time
like
just
being
used
the
way
justice,
rutledge
used
it
and
cole
grove
to
say:
okay,
it
may
be
justiciable.
B
We
have
jurisdiction,
but
and
chancellor
sitting
in
equity,
a
judge
sitting
in
equity
has
to
look
at
multiple
sides.
He
has
to
consider
the
public
interest
here.
Will
this
do
more
harm
than
good?
Just
like
the
judges
who
had
to
decide?
Should
I
strike
down
a
constitution,
or
rather
a
congressional
plan
and
go
back
to
its
predecessor?
B
Is
that
in
the
public
interest-
and
they
often
decided?
No,
it's
really
not
in
the
public
interest
in
justice
rutledge's
case
his
concern
was:
do
we
have
enough
time?
Does
anyone
have
enough
time,
the
illinois
assembly
or
the
court
to
fashion
an
appropriate
remedy?
In
this
case?
Another
thing
you
have
to
remember
too.
In
that
particular
time,
judges
were
kind
of
squeamish
about
equity
courts,
doing
take
exercising
broad
plans
to
authority
to
draw
plans
to
bring
in
special
masters
to
do
things.
B
Generally
speaking,
they
were
accustomed
to
injunctions
ordering
one
or
two
people
to
not
do
something
anymore
or
to
do
something,
but
going
in
and
overhauling
a
governmental
process.
This
was
something
that
they
felt
kind
of
squeamish
about.
B
That
was
pretty
heady
stuff
in
the
mid
50s
and
to
be
honest
with
you,
as
somebody
who
remembers
going
through
court-ordered
school
integration
figuring
out
how
to
draw
a
school
district
and
balanced
population
between
kids
going
to
the
11th
and
12th
grade
is
probably
a
whole
lot
more
difficult
than
balancing
population
for
one
person.
One
vote,
if
you
can
do
that,
the
other
may
not
be
that
difficult.
A
thing
to
do
so,
but
as
to
say
no
equity
on
the
face
can
mean
different
things.
And
it's
contextual.
A
Thank
you.
That's
immensely
helpful
and
and
taught
me
about
aspects
of
law
and
legal
history
that
I
have
no
awareness
of.
So
that's
great,
maybe
a
refresher
for
some
of
the
people
on
the
call.
Does
anyone
else
have
any
any
questions?
I
don't
see
any
hands
raised
or
people
coming
off
of
a
video
or
mute
to
answer,
but
you
certainly
can
any
questions
from
the
team
great
well.
Thank
you
so
much
ted.
This
was
this
was
great
and
wonderful
to
have
said.
B
A
Great
well,
I
think,
then
we
will
have
ben
come
on.
I
believe
he
has
a
restricting
update
for
us.
Sound
good,
you're
right,
great.
D
So
hi
everyone,
I
was
asked
to
give
an
update
on
where
things
stand
in
the
states
in
terms
of
redistricting.
I
will
tell
you
that
I
have
given
a
version
of
this
talk
in
testimony
in
the
past,
and
I
was
when
I
pulled
out
my
phone
when
I
walked
away.
I
was
told
in
text
that
I
was
already
outdated
because
the
state
had
already
changed,
so
there
is
a
risk
that,
as
I
talk
right
now,
a
state
is
adopting
a
final
plan
and
the
information
you
were
getting
is
old.
D
But
for
the
moment
this
is
what
I
understand
to
be
correct.
Based
on
what
I
checked
10
minutes
ago,
so
vault's
head
was
finishing
up
at
this
point.
There
are
10
states
that
have
completely
finished
their
redistricting.
They
are
totally
done.
Those
are
alabama:
delaware,
indiana,
iowa,
maine,
nebraska,
north
carolina,
oregon,
texas
and
west
virginia
there's
an
additional
five
states
that
have
passed
some
type
of
maps
so
either
their
state
legis,
the
state
house,
map
state
senate
map
or
a
congressional
map.
D
Those
states
are
arkansas,
which
is
their
congressional
map,
illinois,
which
is
their
state
legislative
maps,
colorado,
which
is
their
congressional
map,
oklahoma,
the
legislative
maps
in
oregon
the
congressional
map-
and
there
are
several
states
that
I'm
calling
on
the
cusp,
which
means
they're.
Just
almost
there
they're
almost
finished,
there's
just
one
final
procedure,
procedural
hurdle
to
their
maps
being
completed
and
those
states
are
arkansas
for
their
legislative
maps.
D
The
attorney
general
just
released
an
advisory
opinion,
saying
they
don't
go
into
effect
until
january,
so
it
had
been
assumed
that
they
were
already
in
effect
and
then
the
state
attorney
general
released
an
advisory
opinion
saying
no
they're,
not
in
effect
for
another
two
months,
and
so
there
is
some
debate
about
whether
they've
been
in
effect
for
three
weeks
or
they
don't
go
into
effect
for
eight
weeks,
and
so
that's
unresolved
territory.
We're
still
working
that
out
in
colorado.
D
The
legislative
maps
have
to
be
approved
by
the
state
supreme
court
as
the
congressional
maps
were
a
few
weeks
ago
and
we're
just
waiting
on
that
final
approval
from
the
state
supreme
court
before
they
officially
become
law,
but
just
know
the
commission's
work
in
terms
of
drawing
the
lines
is
done
and
just
you
know,
congratulations,
let's
give
a
round
of
applause
to
jerry
berry
who's
on
the
call
just
because
I
know
that
he's
been
working
very
hard
on
this
for
quite
a
while
california.
D
D
The
state
commission
has
just
advanced
several
drafts
of
final
plans
and
they
should
be
adopting
one
within
the
next
week
or
so
and
then
in
idaho
as
well.
The
commission
has
adopted
final
plans,
but
there's
some
formality
with
the
secretary
of
state
that
needs
to
be
completed
before
they're
enacted.
So
those
are
all
the
states
that
are
on
the
cusp
every
other
state
that
I
haven't
mentioned.
D
Yet,
if
you
look
through
their
public
records,
they're,
releasing
draft
plans
they're,
introducing
legislation,
they're
voting
in
committees
right
now
so
they're
all
I
would
say
by
the
next
time
we
meet
for
office
hours.
If
I
do
this
update
again,
we
will
have
well
over
half
the
states,
if
not
more
than
two-thirds
of
them
that
have
already
completed
redistricting.
Even
though
at
this
point
we
only
have
10
who
have
finished
in
total.
D
So
a
lot
of
progress
is
going
to
be
made
over
the
next
month
and
if
you
have
any
questions
about
where
other
states
are
we're,
keeping
a
tracker
on
the
background
here
at
ncsl
we're
not
publishing
it,
because
it's
that
hard
to
keep
it
as
up-to-date
as
possible.
We
update
it
once
a
day
roughly.
But
if
you'd
like
that
information,
we're
happy
to
give
you
what
we
have
so
just
shoot
me.
An
email,
ben.williamsencsl.org
and
I'll
share
with
you
what
I
have,
but
thanks
mandy.
A
Great
thanks
ben
and
if
anyone
has
questions
for
ben
drop
them
in
the
chat,
raise
your
hands,
you
know
the
drill
and
we
can
ask.
We
can
ask
them,
but
I'm
gonna
have
wendy.
Take
it
away
now.
C
So
I
was
in
tampa,
as
were
some
of
the
other
people
on
this
call
last
week
and
jennifer
and
jeff
if
you're
listening
if
you've
got
something
to
share
from
tampa
by
all
means,
get
ready.
For
that.
I
thought
I
would
just
share
with
you
my
experience
going
to
the
hillsborough
county
election
office,
so
hillsborough
county
is
where
tampa
is
they're
1.5
million
people
who
live
there,
900
000
voters.
I
know
that
that's
more
voters
than
some
states
have
residents
when
they
mount
a
big
election.
They
need
two
thousand
plus
poll
workers.
C
So
the
point
is
pretty
darn
big
operation.
There's
a
reason.
I'm
telling
you
all
of
this,
and
that
is
that.
I
hope
that
this
will
inspire
you
to
want
to
go
visit
your
own
election
office
and
and
see
some
of
the
same
stuff.
I
mean
I
I'm
pretty
geeky,
but
some
of
the
rest
of
you
and
it's
fun
to
go,
see
the
equipment
go
and
see
all
of
the
I
was
gonna,
say
bells
and
whistles,
but
it's
really
locks
and
cameras
that
make
this
all
work
all
right.
C
So
in
hillsborough,
a
county
they're
a
little
bit
like
the
nation
in
that,
normally
speaking,
which
would
be
not
in
2020,
one-third
of
the
voters
voted
on
election
day,
one-third
voted
early
in
person
and
one-third
voted
by
an
absentee
ballot
and
florida
does
allow
people
to
vote
with
no
excuse
needed
for
it.
So
a
third,
a
third,
a
third,
that's
pretty
true,
if
you
take
the
whole
nation
as
well,
2020,
not
a
surprise,
pretty
different
for
the
nation
and
for
hillsborough
county
15
on
election
day,
40
early
in
person
and
47
absentee.
C
I
just
want
to
kind
of
focus
on
that
40,
because
our
guides
focused
on
that.
This
made
sense
that
you
were
still
dealing
with
covid
by
not
all
being
jammed
in
and
waiting
in
long
lines
on
election
day.
So
if
they
encourage
people
to
vote
absentee
or
to
come
early
in
person
and
do
their
voting
in
a
quieter
calmer
way,
rather
than
waiting
for
the
big
crush.
C
Also,
they
said
that
it's
a
big
cost
savings
for
them
if
they
can
avoid
that
big
crush
on
election
day
and
that
it
helps
with
getting
the
results
out
on
time.
So
the
things
that
our
group
wanted
to
talk
about
relate
to
security
and
then
about
calming
concerns
that
might
be
voiced
by
constituents
and
on
the
security
front.
These
things
are
not
unusual
for
them,
but
they
have
24-hour
video
on
virtually
all
of
their
equipment.
C
You
have
to
swipe
into
various
areas,
and
different
people
have
different
levels
of
access
that
swiping
gives
them
a
log
of
who's,
been
where
bipartisan
teams
are
the
ones
who
duplicate
any
ballots.
Now
you
may
wonder
why
we're
duplicating
ballots
that
could
sound
a
little
bit
like
fraud
of
some
kind,
but
no,
if
you
spill
coffee
on
a
ballot,
it
is
not
good
for
the
tabulator.
C
So
rather
than
put
a
dirty
ballot
through,
they
have
two
people
together
do
the
work,
and
then
they
literally
go
to
another
bipartisan
team
to
have
them
review
their
work
before
they
choose
it,
they
do
offer
drop
boxes,
they
offer
them
in
staffed
places
at
all
the
early
voting
sites.
They
told
us
that
ballots
are
like
inventory
and
you
always
want
to
know
where
your
inventory
is,
and
so
they
think
of
it.
C
C
So
then
things
about
concerns
that
might
come
from
constituents
and
how
to
calm
them.
They
are
in
the
process
of
making
16
short
videos
about
every
step
of
the
process.
These
are
each
one
to
two
minutes
long
now.
We
then
asked
how
many
people
will
watch
these,
and
so
none
of
us
seem
to
know.
C
This
is
a
big
question
throughout
the
election
community
does
providing
more
video
content
or
other
kinds
of
content
actually
bomb
the
waters
we
don't
know
yet
they
also
do
something
I've
never
heard
of
before,
which
is
that
they
run
their
ballots
through
everyday
es.
That's
a
brand
name
tabulators
and
then
they
all
run
them
all
through
a
different
tabulator,
which
is
called
clear
ballot
and
they
check
the
results
from
one
tabulation
system
against
the
other
and
so
far
so
good.
They
haven't
seen
anything
that
was
ever
suspicious,
but
that's
really
above
and
beyond.
C
They
do
do
a
fair
amount
to
try
to
catch
snowbirds
who
might
think
that
it
would
be
okay
to
vote
at
their
northern
home
address
and
also
in
their
winter
florida
address,
and
we
did
hear
that
if
you're
in
the
virgin
islands
and
you
go
to
register
to
vote
automatically
or
the
staff
lets
the
state
that
you
came
from,
know
that
you
are
now
in
the
virgin
islands
and
should
be
removed
from
the
roles
elsewhere
and
secretary
trey
hargit
from
tennessee
was
with
us,
and
he
said
that
the
role
of
an
election
office
is
to
get
the
results
fast
and
right,
and
then
he
backed
up
for
a
second.
C
He
said.
But
really
right
is
what
matters
and
on
that
front.
Florida
requires
their
absentee
ballots
to
be
received
by
election
day,
not
postmarked
by
election
day,
and
they
said
that
was
a
security
measure
for
them,
because
it
or
a
confidence
measure
at
least
voters
feel
better
if
they
know
what's
the
result.
C
Oh,
the
polls
close
here's
the
result,
as
opposed
to
well
we're
waiting
for
some
dribs
and
drabs
to
come
in,
and
then
I
just
have
one
final
fun
fact
for
you,
and
that
is
that
they
had
enough
people
saying
that
they
didn't
want
to
vote
by
mail
because
they
wouldn't
get
their
sticker,
that
they
decided
to
go
ahead
and
put
a
sticker
in
every
envelope.
That
goes
out
to
the
voters.
C
So
again,
that's
what
I've
got
for
you
from
hillsboro
again,
the
only
reason
to
tell
you
that
is
not
because
I'm
in
favor
of
all
of
the
things
that
are
here
with
the
possible
exception
of
the
sticker,
I'm
willing
to
own
that-
I
think
that's
a
great
idea,
but
just
simply
to
say
that
that
election
officials
around
the
country
are
always
happy
to
have
visitors
and
if
there
is
a
slow
day
or
week
somewhere
between
now
and
retirement,
feel
free
to
ask
your
local
election
official.
A
Thanks
wendy,
so
I'm
gonna
pop
up
on
the
screen,
and
I
will
say
I
was
on
that
tour
and
it
was
fascinating,
but
I'm
popping
up
on
the
screen.
Just
a
quick
preview
of
upcoming
events.
Three
webinars
are
coming
up.
We
have
one
this
month
on
diversity
and
race.
What
census
changes
mean
for
policymakers
and
then
we've
got
a
couple
roundups
coming
in
december,
so
redistricting,
roundup,
and
that
is
on
december
3rd
and
then
december
16th.
We
will
have
kind
of
a
roundup
of
2021's
election
legislation
as
well.
A
The
registration
link
for
the
census
changes.
I
think
christie
put
that
in
the
chat.
So
if
you
want
to
attend,
please
put
those
on
your
calendars
and
then
I
will
just
add
that
the
next
office
hours
will
be
in
december,
it's
december
14th
and
we
will
be
talking
about
redistricting
again.
A
Our
special
guest
will
be
well
adler,
talking
about
the
history
of
redistricting
technology
kind
of
recapping,
a
version
of
the
presentation
that
he
did
at
the
legislative
summit
as
well
with
some
really
cool
images
and
even
videos
of
previous
redistricters
throughout
the
decade.
So
it
was
really
fascinating
and
a
good
companion
to
what
we
got
from
ted
today.
A
A
Oh
okay,
so,
no
but
sorry
to
put
you
on
the
spot,
but
glad
you're
with
us
does
anyone
else
have
anything,
I'm
not
seeing
anything.
So
I
will
let
you
all
go
back
to
your
days
with
five
extra
minutes
and
we
hope
to
see
you
again
in
december.
Thanks
all.