League of Women Voters of Michigan v. Kent County Apportionment Commission

On September 8, 2021, the Kent County Apportionment Commission began the process of drawing new districts for the Board of Commissioners (“county commission”). With new census data, the district lines needed to be adjusted to ensure each district was equally populated. Under state law, county apportionment commissions are made up of the county clerk, county treasurer, prosecuting attorney, and the statutory county chairperson of each of the two political parties receiving the greatest number of votes cast for the office of secretary of state in the last general election. In Michigan, county treasurers, clerks, and prosecuting attorneys are elected via partisan election. In 2021, the apportionment commission was made up of the following members:  

• County Prosecutor Becker (Republican)
• County Clerk Posthumus Lyons (Republican)
• County Treasurer MacGregor, (Republican)
• Kent County Democratic Chair Saxton (Democratic)
• Kent County Republican Chair VerHeulen (Republican) 

Under Michigan state law, county commissioner districts must be apportioned based on certain criteria. These include equal population, contiguity, compactness, and avoiding the combination or division of townships, cities, or precincts. The final criteria is that “[d]istricts shall not be drawn to effect partisan political advantage.” 

Two commissioners on the Apportionment Commission, VerHeulen and Saxton, submitted maps for the Commission’s review and potential adoption. The Apportionment Commission voted 4-1 to implement VerHeulen’s map, with all four Republican commissioners in support. The final VerHeulen map is depicted and linked below.  

gis.kentcountymi.gov/public/commissionerviewerjs/ 

On November 18, 2021, the League of Women Voters of Michigan filed a lawsuit challenging the VerHeulen map in the Michigan Court of Appeals, claiming it violated state law. Specifically, the League argued the map was a partisan gerrymander favoring Republicans, lacked contiguity, and failed to preserve township and city boundaries. The League pointed to expert testimony showing that VerHeulen’s map ensured Republicans would likely keep control of the county commission even if Democratic candidates won the popular vote by 10% countywide. The complaint also stated that the adopted plan had more than twice the divided municipalities than the Saxton map in violation of Michigan Supreme Court case law.  

On January 3, 2022, the Michigan Court of Appeals sided with the Republicans on the Kent County Apportionment Committee. The three-judge panel held that the VerHeulen map complied, at least minimally, with Michigan state law, and was therefore, legally acceptable. Following this court ruling, the League appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court. 

On March 25, 2022, the Michigan Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal. In her concurring opinion, Justice Cavanaugh emphasized that the Apportionment Committee was not required to comply with each of the listed criteria for map drawing to the maximum extent. Instead, she wrote that these criteria were meant to be guidepost considerations and were explicitly given differing levels of priority in the law’s text. Justice Cavanaugh also argued that, under the text and requirements of the law, the VerHeulen map complied most strongly with the criteria that were prioritized, and, thus, the map was acceptable.  

The League was represented in this matter by Goodman Acker, P.C.