Plaintiffs' Map Submission
On October 6, 2025, as part of the ongoing remedial process in this case, the Plaintiffs filed two map submissions with the Court. These maps were submitted because the map enacted by the Legislature on October 6, 2025, failed to abide by and conform to Proposition 4’s requirements.
On October 17, 2025, the Plaintiffs submitted briefs and expert reports in support of these map submissions. The Court held an evidentiary hearing on October 23 and 24, 2025.
On November 10, 2025, the Plaintiffs' Map 1 was ordered to be implemented by the Court. Map 1 comes from a set of 10,000 maps generated by a computer algorithm designed to comply with Proposition 4’s priority-ordered redistricting criteria without considering partisan data. Map 1 splits only one municipality and has a significant population overlap with the Commission's Orange and Purple Maps (84.6% and 80.6%, respectively).
Plaintiffs' Map 2, which was not selected, was a "least change" map based on the Legislature's adopted map with changes made to correct its failures to conform to Proposition 4's requirements. In particular, it corrected the enacted map’s failure to minimize municipal and county splits to the greatest extent practicable and the enacted map’s failure to comply with Proposition 4’s prohibition on party favoritism. Map 2 split only one municipality and had an average of 84.1% population overlap with the Legislature’s enacted map. Map 2 also had substantial population overlap with the Commission’s Purple (82.0%) and Orange (77.8%) maps.