,,ii #aaeth ,,congress #b;d ,session ,s4 #cabc ,,in ,,the ,,senate ,,of ,,the ,,united ,,states ,june #be1 #bjah ,mr4 ,bennet introduced the following bill2 which was read twice and referred to the ,committee on the ,judiciary ,a ,,bill ,to create a more representative and accountable ,congress by prohibiting partisan gerrymandering and ensuring that any redistricting of congressional district boundaries results in fair1 effective1 and accountable representation for all people4 #a4 ,short title ,this ,act may be cited as the ,fair ,maps ,act of #bjah4 #b4 ,findings ,congress finds the following3 7#a7 ,democracy in the ,united ,states is rooted in the notion of actual representation and a rejection of the earlier ,british concept of virtual representation4 ,in #aggf1 in ,thoughts on ,government1 ,john ,adams wrote that a legislative assembly 8should be in miniature1 an exact portrait of the people at large404 ,thomas ,paine argued in ,common ,sense that a legislature should act 8in the same manner as the whole body of the people would act were they present404 ,at the ,constitutional ,convention1 both ,federalists and ,anti-,federalists agreed4 ,federalist ,james ,wilson declared1 for example1 that the new ,house of ,representatives 8ought to be the most exact transcript of the whole ,society01 while his counterpart ,george ,mason argued that the 8requisites in actual representation are that the ,reps4 should sympathize with their constituents2 shd4 think as they think1 feel as they feel404 7#b7 ,the ,supreme ,court made clear in ,reynolds v4 ,sims1 #cgg ,u4,s4 #ecc 7#aifd71 that the objective of redistricting is to achieve fair and effective representation for all1 that legislatures should be bodies which are collectively responsive to the popular will1 and that the ,constitution guarantees the opportunity for equal participation by all voters4 7#c7 ,partisan gerrymandering is incompatible with democratic principles at the foundation of the ,republic4 ,the drawing of electoral districts to benefit or disadvantage certain political parties denies people fair1 effective1 and accountable representation by allowing representatives to choose their voters rather than voters to choose their representatives4 7#d7 ,in ,davis v4 ,bandemer1 #dgh ,u4,s4 #aji 7#aihf71 the ,supreme ,court explained that it has 8repeatedly stated that districting that would #8operate to minimize or cancel out the voting strength of racial or political elements of the voting population' would raise a constitutional question04 7#e7 ,the ,constitution of the ,united ,states empowers ,congress to ensure that congressional districting promotes fair1 effective1 and accountable representation for all people1 as demonstrated in-- 7,a7 article ,i1 section #b1 clause #a1 of the ,constitution of the ,united ,states2 7,b7 article ,i1 section #d1 clause #a1 of the ,constitution of the ,united ,states2 7,c7 article ,i1 section #e1 clause #a1 of the ,constitution of the ,united ,states2 7,d7 section #e of the ,fourteenth ,amendment to the ,constitution of the ,united ,states2 and 7,e7 section #b of the ,fifteenth ,amendment to the ,constitution of the ,united ,states4 7#f7 ,in ,vieth v4 ,jubelirer1 #eda ,u4,s4 #bfg 7#bjjd71 the ,supreme ,court recognized that the ,framers provided a remedy for partisan gerrymandering in the ,constitution through the power bestowed on ,congress to regulate elections1 and ''' to restrain the practice of political gerrymandering44 7#g7 ,this power has not lain dormant1 as ,congress has repeatedly exercised its authority under article ,i1 section #d to regulate congressional districting criteria when ,congress passed the ,apportionment ,act of #ahdb 7#e ,stat4 #dia71 the ,apportionment ,act of #ahfb 7#ab ,stat4 #egb71 the ,apportionment ,act of #ahgb 7#ag ,stat4 #bh71 the ,apportionment ,act of #aija 7#ca ,stat4 #gcc71 the ,apportionment ,act of #aiaa 7#cg ,stat4 #ac71 the ,apportionment ,act of #aida 7#ee ,stat4 #gfa71 and the #aifg amendment to the ,apportionment ,act of #aibi 7,public ,law #ij-aif74 #c4 ,districting criteria 7a7 ,required criteria ,following each ,federal decennial census of population1 each ,state with more than one congressional district shall establish or alter the boundaries of each congressional district of the ,state in accordance with each of the following criteria3 7#a7 ,compliance with the ,constitution of the ,united ,states1 including the requirement of equal population4 7#b7 ,compliance with the ,voting ,rights ,act of #aife 7#eb ,u4,s4,c4 #ajcja et seq474 7b7 ,prohibited criteria ,except to the extent necessary to comply with subsection 7a7 and section #d1 in establishing or altering the boundaries of any congressional district of a ,state1 the ,state may not consider the following criteria3 7#a7 ,the political party registration or affiliation of the residents of the ,state4 7#b7 ,the voting history of the residents of the ,state4 7#c7 ,the election results of the precincts of the ,state4 7#d7 ,the place of residence of any incumbent1 political candidate1 or potential political candidate4 7c7 ,permissible criteria ,a ,state may consider other criteria1 in addition to the required criteria under subsection 7a71 in establishing or altering the boundaries of its congressional districts1 to the extent such other criteria do not conflict with the requirements of this section or violate section #d4 ,the permissible criteria under this subsection may include any of the following3 7#a7 ,geographic contiguity and compactness4 7#b7 ,respect for communities of interest4 ,such communities of interest-- 7,a7 may be based on factors including shared cultural or historical characteristics or economic interests2 and 7,b7 may not be based on associations with any political party1 incumbent1 or political candidate1 or potential political candidate4 7#c7 ,respect for counties1 cities1 and other political subdivisions4 #d4 ,prohibition on partisan gerrymandering 7a7 ,prohibition ,except as necessary to comply with section #c7;a71 a ,state shall not establish a congressional districting plan that has the purpose or will have the effect of unduly favoring or disfavoring any political party4 7b7 ,enforcement 7#a7 ,in general ,any eligible voter of a ,state may bring a civil action before a #c-;judge court convened in accordance with section #bbhd of title #bh1 ,united ,states ,code1 for a violation of subsection 7a74 7#b7 ,court order ,a court in a civil action under this subsection-- 7,a7 may issue an order invalidating the congressional districting plan of such ,state on the grounds that the plan violates subsection 7a72 7,b7 shall consider any violation of section #c to be probative evidence that the districting plan has the purpose of unduly favoring or disfavoring a political party2 and 7,c7 may consider1 among other things1 statistical evidence of the extent and durability of partisan bias1 electoral responsiveness1 and the ability of each party to translate votes into seat share4 7c7 ,remedies ,in remedying a violation of subsection 7a71 a court shall apply the following3 7#a7 ,if the court finds that the ,state has established a congressional districting plan with the purpose of unduly favoring or disfavoring a political party1 the court shall appoint a special master or panel of special masters to propose a remedy to the court for the violation4 7#b7 ,if the court finds that the ,state has established a congressional districting plan that will have the effect1 but does not have the purpose1 of unduly favoring or disfavoring a political party1 the court may1 in its discretion1 appoint a special master or panel of special masters to propose a remedy to the court for the violation4 7d7 ,legislative privilege ,no person1 legislature1 or ,state may claim legislative privilege under either ,state or ,federal law in a civil action brought under this section or in any other legal challenge1 under either ,state or ,federal law1 to a congressional districting plan4 #e4 ,safe harbor ,with respect to any claim under section #d1 a ,state's enacted congressional districting plan shall have a rebuttable presumption of validity if that plan was created by a nonpartisan or bipartisan redistricting commission1 where support from members of more than one political party and1 if applicable1 nonaffiliated members1 is required to approve a congressional districting plan4 #f4 ,other laws 7a7 ,no preemption ,nothing in this ,act shall be construed to preempt any cause of action under ,state law1 or limit or abrogate any cause of action under ,federal law4 7b7 ,other districting criteria ,nothing in this ,act shall be construed to prevent a ,state from adopting congressional districting criteria or procedures that do not conflict with this ,act and that serve to limit potential exposure to liability under section #d7;a74 7c7 ,voting ,rights ,act ,nothing in this ,act shall be construed to preempt or alter any provision of the ,voting ,rights ,act of #aife 7#eb ,u4,s4,c4 #ajcja et seq474 #g4 ,severability ,if any provision of this ,act or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional1 the remainder of this ,act and the application of the provision to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected4