The United State: A Constitutional Challenge
Proving the unconstitutionality of congressional districts and the necessity of a Statewide Proportional Open-List System.
7.0 Constitutional Supremacy and the Protection of Voters
The constitutional argument presented in this document does not exist in a vacuum. The history of American electoral law is in significant part a history of states using their authority over elections to suppress voters, dilute votes, and manipulate electoral outcomes. Any proposed electoral system must therefore address not only its constitutional foundation but also its constitutional protection against state interference.
Two constitutional principles provide that protection.
The first is the Supremacy Clause of Article VI, which establishes that the Constitution and federal laws made pursuant to it are the supreme law of the land. Any state action that undermines a constitutionally mandated electoral system is automatically invalid under this principle. A state may not, through legislation, administrative action, or any other means, substitute its own preferences for the constitutional requirements established by Article I, Section 2.
The second is Article I, Section 2 itself. The Constitution mandates that Representatives be chosen by the People of the several States - all of them. Any state action that suppresses voters or dilutes votes directly contradicts this mandate. Voter suppression is not merely a policy problem or a civil rights concern - it is a constitutional violation of the foundational principle upon which the House of Representatives was established. When any citizen is prevented from participating in choosing their State's Representatives, the constitutional requirement that those Representatives be chosen by the People of the State is violated.
This includes, most visibly, the practice of gerrymandering - the manipulation of electoral boundaries to predetermine outcomes and render the votes of targeted citizens effectively meaningless. While gerrymandering has been treated primarily as a political question by the courts, it is in its essence an assault on the constitutional mandate of Article I, Section 2. A system that predetermines who wins before a single vote is cast cannot honestly claim to be a system in which Representatives are chosen by the People.
The electoral system proposed in the pages that follow eliminates gerrymandering entirely - not as a side effect, but as a direct constitutional consequence of returning to the state-wide electoral mandate of Article I, Section 2.