Mauldin, et al. v. Branch, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00146-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-CA-00146-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-18-2003 Opinion Author: Waller, J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Congressional redistricting - Jurisdiction of chancery court - Section 5-3-123 - Section 5-3-127 - At-large elections - Section 23-15-1039 Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Cobb and Carlson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Graves, J. Dissenting Author : McRae, P.J. Concurs in Result Only: Easley, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: State Boards and Agencies |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-21-2001 Appealed from: Hinds County Chancery Court Judge: Patricia D. Wise Disposition: Adopted a congressional redistricting plan after the legislature failed to do so. Case Number: G-2001-1777 |
|
| Note: | PITTMAN, C.J., SMITH, P.J., COBB AND CARLSON, JJ., CONCUR. EASLEY, J., CONCURS IN RESULT ONLY. GRAVES, J., DISSENTS WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION. McRAE, P.J., DISSENTS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION. DIAZ, J., NOT PARTICIPATING. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Carolyn Mauldin, Stacy Spearman, David Mitchell, James Clay Hays, Jr. and Mississippi Republican Executive Committee |
MICHAEL B. WALLACE
CHRISTOPHER ROYCE SHAW
ARTHUR F. JERNIGAN, JR.
RICHARD F. SCRUGGS
F. KEITH BALL
GRANT M. FOX
STACI BOZANT O'NEAL |
||
| Appellee: | Beatrice Branch, Rims Barber, L.C. Dorsey, David Rule, Melvin Horton, James Woodard, Joseph P. Hudson and Robert Norvel | ROBERT B. McDUFF CARLTON W. REEVES |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Congressional redistricting - Jurisdiction of chancery court - Section 5-3-123 - Section 5-3-127 - At-large elections - Section 23-15-1039 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Following the 2000 decennial census, Mississippi’s delegation to the United States House of Representatives was reduced from five to four representatives. The State Legislature failed to submit a new congressional redistricting plan as required by section 5-3-123 and left the old five-district plan in place. Beatrice Branch, Rims Barber, L. C. Dorsey, David Rule, Melvin Horton, James Woodard, Joseph Hudson and Robert Norvel filed for injunctive relief in the Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, against the State Board of Election Commissioners, alleging that it did not appear to be likely that the Legislative Standing Joint Congressional Redistricting Committee would submit a new redistricting plan and requesting the chancery court to adopt and implement a plan in time for preclearance and the candidate qualifying deadline of March 1, 2002. The Committee filed a motion to dismiss which the court denied. Suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi for an injunction to stay the state court action. The District Court deferred ruling on the request for an injunction so that state authorities would have a continued opportunity to redistrict. The Committee filed for writs of prohibition and mandamus in the Mississippi Supreme Court alleging that the chancery court lacked jurisdiction. The Supreme Court denied the petitions. The chancery court conducted a trial in which 11 proposed redistricting plans were submitted into evidence. The chancery court adopted the submitted plan called "Branch Plan 2A." This plan was submitted for preclearance. A short time later, the District Court announced that it had drawn a redistricting plan and that it intended to implement this plan absent timely preclearance of the chancery court plan. The District Court subsequently enjoined the chancery court plan and ordered implementation of its own plan. The United States Supreme Court affirmed the federal injunction strictly due to the fact that the chancery court plan had not been precleared. Mauldin appeals the issues of the chancery court's assumption of jurisdiction and its adoption of the Branch Plan 2A. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Jurisdiction Section 5-3-123 authorizes only the Legislature to draw congressional districts. Section 5-3-127authorizes all political subdivisions, state agencies, and all other creatures of the state of Mississippi to assist the Legislature with professional, technical and other expertise in redistricting. Since state courts are only authorized to assist in redistricting, not to engage in the act of redistricting, the chancery court was clearly erroneous in assuming jurisdiction of this matter in which the parties requested the court to engage in redistricting. Issue 2: At-large elections The State has a statutorily-mandated and federally-approved default procedure which comes into play when the Legislature fails to act. Section 23-15-1039 provides for at-large elections when the Legislature fails in its duty to provide new congressional districts. However, an at-large election cannot be held at present. Due to the Legislature's failure to act, the State is currently under a federal court injunction which will remain in place until that court vacates it or the Legislature draws a redistricting plan which is then federally precleared. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
