link to page 2 
INSIGHTi
Redistricting Commissions for Congressional
Districts
Updated May 28, 2021
Historical y, state legislatures have determined congressional district boundaries, and this remains true in
most states. The role of political actors in redistricting at times leads to concerns, by some, about
conflicting incentives, if the process is used by incumbents to help boost their parties’ electoral gains. In
recent Congresses, several bil s have been introduced that could require states to use independent
redistricting commissions for U.S. House redistricting; the House has passed two such bil s, H.R. 1 (117th
Congress) and H.R. 1 (116th Congress).
Some states have adopted independent redistricting commissions, which are typical y composed of
members of the public and often described as bipartisan or nonpartisan, as an alternative method for
congressional redistricting. Proponents believe such commissions can prevent opportunities for partisan
gerrymandering and may create more competitive, representative districts. Others, however, have argued
that the effect of redistricting methods on electoral competitiveness is overstated and the structure of
many commissions can al ow political considerations to remain. Some redistricting commissions, for
example, may not prohibit certain political officials from membership.
For congressional districts, redistricting commissions have the primary responsibility for drawing district
lines in 11 of the 44 states that were apportioned multiple U.S. House seats following the 2020 census, as
shown in Figure 1. Several states (Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Virginia) have adopted such
commissions since the 2010 census. Other states have different types of commissions associated with
congressional redistricting. Iowa, for example, uses a redistricting commission composed of nonpartisan
legislative staff and requires legislative approval to enact the maps. Maine, Rhode Island, and Utah have
advisory commissions. In Connecticut, Indiana, and Ohio, a commission can serve as a backup
redistricting method, if the state legislature is unable to agree upon a plan. A number of states also use
commissions for state legislative redistricting.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11053
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Figure 1. State Redistricting Methods
Source: CRS compilation, based on information from Bal otpedia and the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Graphic created by Amber Hope Wilhelm, CRS Visual Information Specialist.
Notes: Iowa has nonpartisan legislative staff create its redistricting maps but requires legislative approval to enact them. In
New York, redistricting plans also require gubernatorial approval.
Recent Congressional Proposals
Several bil s in the 116th Congress contained provisions that would have required states to use
independent redistricting commissions for congressional elections, including H.R. 1, H.R. 124, H.R. 130,
H.R. 163, H.R. 1612, H.R. 3572, H.R. 4000, S. 949, and S. 2226. To date in the 117th Congress, bil s
proposing independent redistricting commissions include H.R. 1, H.R. 80, H.R. 100, and S. 1. Many of
these bil s have not advanced out of committee, but the House has passed H.R. 1 (117th Congress) and
H.R. 1 (116th Congress). Resolutions have also been introduced in recent Congresses, but not agreed to,
that would have encouraged (but not required) states to alter their redistricting processes or adopt
independent redistricting commissions.
Congressional bil s on this subject vary in the degree of specificity used to prescribe commission
composition, processes, and timelines. Some bil s provide a few basic parameters that state redistricting
commissions would be required to follow and largely al ow states to determine commission features.
Other bil s provide more extensive requirements for independent redistricting commissions that would
apply across states. Bil s also may or may not authorize funding for states to use for redistricting
commissions. Some provisions included in congressional bil s are similar to practices used by certain
states with independent redistricting commissions.
Considerations Related to Commission Features
Congress may continue to al ow states to establish their own congressional redistricting processes, or
Congress may consider requiring or incentivizing states to adopt a particular congressional redistricting
method or set of criteria. Among the 18 states that have commissions associated with congressional
redistricting in some way, state practices vary in a number of aspects related to how the commissions
operate, including details that may have implications for the degree of independence a commission has
Congressional Research Service
3
from other political actors or from public oversight. Some of these features, described below, may be of
interest for Congress, if it is considering redistricting commission legislation.
Who Is Selected for the Commission and How?
Commission membership choices can affect how insulated the commission is from actual or perceived
political influence. In many states, an individual serving on a redistricting commission cannot participate
in certain specified political activities (e.g., serving as an elected official, political party official, or being
a registered lobbyist) immediately prior to, during, or immediately following commission service. Often,
majority and minority party legislative leaders are involved in selecting commissioners, who are chosen
in equal numbers from the two major parties. Such bipartisan commission structures may seek to balance
political or partisan interests, rather than remove them entirely from the process. States may also include
nonpartisan commissioners, or have selection methods that do not involve party leaders.
Opportunities for Public Input and Transparency
Independent redistricting commissions can sometimes be structured in ways that may make them less
publicly accountable than elected state legislatures. Ensuring transparency in redistricting commission
activities, and providing opportunities for public input, is thought by some to help establish public trust in
the process and in the legitimacy of commission-generated redistricting plans. Some states include
requirements for a certain number of public meetings; publication of redistricting plan proposals under
consideration; or the opportunity for public comments prior to the adoption of a final redistricting plan.
Criteria for a Plan
States often require that redistricting plans meet certain criteria; for more information, see CRS Insight
IN11618, Congressional Redistricting Criteria and Considerations. These criteria often include factors
like ensuring that districts comply with federal election law; have roughly equal population sizes; are
geographical y contiguous and/or compact; are not designed to give advantage to a political party or
incumbent; preserve municipal boundaries; or seek to maintain communities with shared historic, cultural,
or economic interests.
Approval or Modification of Redistricting Commission’s Plan
Once a redistricting commission has created a map of congressional districts, states vary in how such a
plan may be enacted. In some states, the plan agreed upon by the commission automatical y becomes the
new redistricting map. Other states require approval of the commission’s plan by the state supreme court
or legislature. States may also provide mechanisms by which the legislature can amend the commission’s
plan or may authorize the courts to determine if changes are needed.
Author Information
Sarah J. Eckman
Analyst in American National Government
Congressional Research Service
4
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11053 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED