LEGISLATIVE PANEL TO MEET ON REDISTRICTING DISPUTE

Chet Brokaw
July 7, 2005

PIERRE (AP) --- South Dakota legislative leaders will hold an emergency meeting Monday to decide how to respond to a federal judge's ruling that said the current legislative redistricting plan violates the rights of American Indians.

The Legislature's Executive Board, which handles management issues for the Legislature, will meet with lawyers from the attorney general's office.

Sen. Ed Olson, R-Mitchell, chairman of the Executive Board, said lawmakers will discuss whether to hold a special legislative session to pass an alternate redistricting plan or take some other action.

The state must respond to U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier by July 29, Olson said.

Most legislators want to find the quickest way to get the case to a federal appeals court because they believe appeals judges might rule that the plan passed in 2001 was the best available for Indian voters, Olson said.

Olson said he hasn't decided yet what would be the best strategy.

''I really don't know what it's going to be,'' Olson said.

Schreier ruled last year that the redistricting plan passed in 2001 violated the voting rights of American Indians in two districts in south-central South Dakota. Those districts include the Pine Ridge, Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian reservations.

Schreier said the 2001 plan illegally packed Indians into District 27, which includes the Rosebud Indian Reservation and part of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. That district covers Shannon and Todd counties and a connecting strip across southern Bennett County.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing Indians who filed the lawsuit, has offered two plans that it said would redistribute District 27 voters and provide a good chance of electing an Indian to a House seat in adjoining District 26. The current District 26 includes Haakon, Jackson, Jones, Lyman, Mellette and Tripp counties and part of Bennett County.

Schreier had asked the South Dakota Supreme Court to determine whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to redistrict now. The court last week ruled that the Legislature does have constitutional authority to fix the redistricting plan in response to Schreier's order.

Olson and other House and Senate leaders said the Legislature could decide to hold a special session to pass a new plan that makes minor or major changes in the two districts. The Legislature also could vote to reaffirm its support of the redistricting plan passed in 2001.

Most lawmakers appear to believe the existing redistricting plan is the best option, Olson said. The U.S. Justice Department cleared that plan and residents of the area supported it, he said.

Senate Republican Leader Eric Bogue of Faith said he supports the existing boundaries for the two districts and hopes the Legislature will tell Schreier that the state will continue to back that plan.

House Democratic Leader Dale Hargens of Miller said that if the Legislature decides to stick with the 2001 plan, a special session should still be held so the entire Legislature can put its stamp of approval on that existing plan.

If the Legislature reaffirms the existing plan, then Schreier likely would draw up new districts after taking suggestions from the ACLU.

At that point, the judge's decision would be final and the state could ask the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn her ruling that the 2001 plan violated Indians' voting rights.

The legislative leaders agreed that whatever the outcome of the redistricting decision, they hope it will not take effect until the next election for legislative seats in 2006. A special election would confuse voters and lead to a brief campaign that would prevent voters from gaining a full understanding of candidates and issues, Bogue said.