West Virginia

Redistricting political control:

West Virginia's congressional and state legislative lines are both drawn by the state legislature, as a regular statute, subject to gubernatorial veto. The members of the state Senate task force responsible for redistricting are listed here; the members of the state House panel are listed here.

Census data were delivered to West Virginia on March 23, 2011.

West Virginia law does not set a particular deadline for drawing congressional or state legislative lines. The 2012 legislative session will begin on January 9, 2012, and is scheduled to end on March 9, 2012. Candidates must file for congressional and state legislative primary elections by January 28, 2012. [W.V. Const. art. VI, §§ 18, 22; W.V. Code § 3-5-7(c)]

West Virginia law prohibits redrawing state legislative districts mid-decade, before the next Census; there is no similar provision pertaining to congressional lines. [W.V. Const. art. VI, § 10]

The state Senate's redistricting task force has announced a series of informational meetings around the state, to collect public input. The meeting schedule and archived video from past meetings are here. The state House's select redistricting committee has just begun its own meeting schedule, with hearings listed here.

The public may also post or reply to comments on existing districts, online.

Like all states, West Virginia must comply with constitutional equal population requirements; state law further provides that state legislative districts be equal in population, as nearly as practicable. [W.V. Const. art. VI, § 4; W.V. Code § 1-2-1]

West Virginia must also, like all states, abide by section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The West Virginia constitution further requires that state Senate districts compact, contiguous, and bounded by county lines where doing so is not otherwise unlawful. When the legislature in 2001 last drew state legislative districts, it also declared that it would take into account communities of interest. State legislative districts may be multimember districts. [W.V. Const. art. VI, § 4; W.V. Code § 1-2-1; Holloway v. Hechler, 817 F.Supp. 618 (S.D.W.Va. 1992)]

Jefferson County Comm'n v. Tennant, No. 3:11-cv-00096 (N.D. W.Va.), No. 2:11-cv-00989 (S.D. W.Va.), No. 11A674 and No. 11-1184 (Sup. Ct.): a challenge in federal court to the congressional redistricting plan, based on unequal population and allegedly insufficient attention to compactness under state law.
     - Trial court
          - Complaint (Nov. 4).
          - Complaint by intervenor Cooper (Nov. 22).
          - Intervenor Cooper motion for summary judgment (Dec. 19).
          - Plaintiffs' opening brief (Dec. 20), response (Dec. 22).
          - Defendants' opening brief (Dec. 20), response by plaintiffs, Cooper (Dec. 22).
          - Opinion granting motion for summary judgment, dissent (Jan. 3).
          - Order denying request for stay (Jan. 10).
     - U.S. Supreme Court
          - State's application for stay pending appeal and appendix (Jan. 13).
          - Jefferson County Comm'n response (Jan. 17), State's reply (Jan. 18).
          - Stay granted by Supreme Court pending appeal (Jan. 20).
          - Jurisdictional statement (Mar. 27).
          - Appellee's motion to dismiss or affirm (May 25), opposition (June 5).
          - Opinion reversing district court (Sept. 25).
     - Trial court II
          - Court briefing order on remand (Oct. 5).
               - Response by intervenor (Oct. 24), plaintiffs, State (Dec. 3).
The latest: On January 3, the court granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, finding the enacted plan in violation of federal equal population requirements. On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed, finding that the state's consistently applied legitimate policies -- including maintaining political subdivisions, avoiding contests between incumbents, and minimizing population shifts -- were sufficient to support the 0.79% population disparity in congressional districts.

State of West Virginia ex rel. Cooper v. Tennant, No. 11-1405 (W.Va. Sup. Ct.): a challenge in state court to the state House redistricting plan, based on allegedly insufficient attention to preserving county boundaries.
     - Petition for writ of mandamus, appendix (Oct. 13, 2011).
     - Response by state Secretary of State (Nov. 4).
     - Response by Intervenor Speaker of the House, appendix (Nov. 4).
     - Order denying petition (Nov. 23) and final opinion (Feb. 13), dissent (July 20).
The latest: On November 23, the state Supreme Court denied the petitioner's claims, finding the plan constitutionally acceptable.

State of West Virginia ex rel. Andes v. Tennant, No. 11-1447 (W.Va. Sup. Ct.): a challenge in state court to the state House redistricting plan, based on allegedly insufficient attention to preserving county boundaries, unequal representation to certain counties, and partisan gerrymandering.
     - Petition for writ of prohibition, appendix (Oct. 21, 2011).
     - Response by state Secretary of State (Nov. 4).
     - Response by Intervenor Speaker of the House, appendix (Nov. 4).
     - Order denying petition (Nov. 23) and final opinion (Feb. 13), dissent (July 20).
The latest: On November 23, the state Supreme Court denied the petitioner's claims, finding the plan constitutionally acceptable.

State of West Virginia ex rel. County Comm'n of Monroe County v. Tennant, No. 11-1516 (W.Va. Sup. Ct.): a challenge in state court to the state House redistricting plan, based on allegedly insufficient attention to preserving county boundaries, and on allegedly improper implementation of multi-member districts.
     - Petition for writ of prohibition (Nov. 4).
     - Response by state Secretary of State (Nov. 14).
     - Response by Intervenor Speaker of the House, appendix (Nov. 14).
     - Order denying petition (Nov. 23) and final opinion (Feb. 13), dissent (July 20).
The latest: On November 23, the state Supreme Court denied the petitioner's claims, finding the plan constitutionally acceptable.

State of West Virginia ex rel. Callen v. Tennant, No. 11-1517 (W.Va. Sup. Ct.): a challenge in state court to the state Senate redistricting plan, based on allegedly insufficient attention to preserving county boundaries and compactness.
     - Petition for writ of mandamus, appendix (Nov. 4).
     - Response by state Secretary of State (Nov. 14).
     - Order denying petition (Nov. 23) and final opinion (Feb. 13), dissent (July 20).
The latest: On November 23, the state Supreme Court denied the petitioner's claims, finding the plan constitutionally acceptable.

State of West Virginia ex rel. Cooper v. Tennant II, No. 11-1525 (W.Va. Sup. Ct.): a challenge in state court to the state Senate redistricting plan, based on allegedly insufficient attention to preserving county boundaries, compactness, and unequal population.
     - Petition for writ of mandamus, appendix (Nov. 7).
     - Response by state Secretary of State (Nov. 14).
     - Order denying petition (Nov. 23) and final opinion (Feb. 13), dissent (July 20).
The latest: On November 23, the state Supreme Court denied the petitioner's claims, finding the plan constitutionally acceptable.

In the 2000 redistricting cycle, the West Virginia legislature passed a congressional plan and a state legislative plan, both signed on October 4, 2001.

The state legislative plan was challenged in federal court, and upheld. [Deem v. Manchin, 188 F. Supp. 2d 651 (N.D.W.Va. 2002), aff'd sub nom. Unger v. Manchin, 536 U.S. 935.]