Is Federal Congressional Redistricting in Maryland Governed by Article III, Section 4 of the State Constitution? An Analysis of the Trial Court Opinion in Szeliga v. Lamone.

52 Pages Posted: 17 May 2024 Last revised: 9 Jan 2025

See all articles by Dan Friedman

Dan Friedman

Appellate Court of Maryland

Barnett Harris

Georgetown University Law Center

Date Written: May 10, 2024

Abstract

In Szeliga v. Lamone, a state trial court determined for the first time that Article III, Section 4 of the Maryland Constitution applies to restrict the Maryland General Assembly’s power to adopt a plan of congressional redistricting. Using theories of constitutional interpretation including textualism, originalism, comparative constitutional law, and common law constitutional interpretation, we reject the trial court’s interpretation. Instead, we suggest better techniques for interpreting the state constitution and perhaps for combating excessive partisan gerrymandering.

Keywords: State Constitutions, Maryland Constitution, Redistricting

JEL Classification: k19

Suggested Citation

Friedman, Dan and Harris, Barnett, Is Federal Congressional Redistricting in Maryland Governed by Article III, Section 4 of the State Constitution? An Analysis of the Trial Court Opinion in Szeliga v. Lamone. (May 10, 2024). Maryland Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 1261, 2024, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4824242

Dan Friedman (Contact Author)

Appellate Court of Maryland

361 Rowe Boulevard
Annapolis, MD Maryland 21204
United States

Barnett Harris

Georgetown University Law Center ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
30
Abstract Views
249
PlumX Metrics