CONGRESSIONAL APPORTIONMENT (EXCERPT)
Act 282 of 1964
3.55 “Block” and “tract” defined.Sec. 5.
As used in this act:
(a) "Block" means block as that term is used by the United States department of commerce, bureau of the census in conducting the 2010 decennial census.
(b) "Tract" means tract as that term is used by the United States department of commerce, bureau of the census in conducting the 2010 decennial census.
History: Add. 2001, Act 115, Eff. Mar. 22, 2002
Am. 2011, Act 128, Eff. Mar. 28, 2012
Constitutionality: In an original action, plaintiffs challenged the plan for redistricting Michigan's fifteen seats in the U.S. House of Representatives adopted by 2001 PA 115. Plaintiffs claimed that the statute was not validly enacted because the bill passed by the Legislature was changed by the Secretary of the Senate before presentation to the Governor for his approval. Second, they contended that the redistricting plan failed to comply with Michigan statutory requirements for congressional redistricting established by 1999 PA 221.The Michigan Supreme Court concluded: (1) 2001 PA 115 was validly enacted because the changes made before submission to the Governor were technical corrections that did not violate the provisions of the Michigan Constitution regarding enactment of legislation; (2) the redistricting guidelines of MCL 3.63 (c), as enacted by 1999 PA 211, were not binding on the Legislature's redistricting of Michigan's congressional seats in 2001; and (3) the reference to the 1999 guidelines in the 2001 redistricting act did not indicate legislative intent to make the redistricting plan reviewable using those guidelines. The Court denied plaintiff's application for review of the congressional redistricting plan. LeRoux v Secretary of State, 465 Mich 594 (2002).
© 2015 Legislative Council, State of Michigan