A state court challenge to Alaska legislative redistricting plan. The Plaintiffs allege the plan violates (1) Article VI §§ 6 and 10 of the Alaskan Constitution and (2) the equal protection (Article I § 1) and due process clause (Article I § 7) of the Alaskan Constitution.

Four other challenges (City of Skagway v. Alaska Redistricting Board, City of Valdez v. Alaska Redistricting Board, Matanuska-Susitna Borough v. Alaska Redistricting Board, Calista Corporation v. Alaska Redistricting Board) to the 2021 redistricting plan were consolidated with Wilson on Dec. 15, 2021 under ITMO 2021 Redistricting Plan. The ARB moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim on Dec. 21, 2021. The Court denied the motion to dismiss on Jan. 12, 2022.

On Feb. 15, 2022 the Court remanded the redistricting question back the ARB, holding the ARB process violated state law and order the ARB to take a “hard look” at House Districts 3 and 4 and Senate District K.

On Mar. 2, 2022 the ARB, City of Valdez, City of Skagway and Matanuska-Susitna Borough petitioned the Supreme Court of Alaska to review the lower court’s decision. On Mar. 25, 2022 the Supreme Court upheld House District’s 3 and 4, but held Senate District K and House District 36 violated the state constitution and remanded it back to ARB to correct.