Ater v. Keisling
Oregon Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFadeley, J.
I concur fully in the disposition and opinions concerning the reapportionment cases but would go further. The dispositions of the petitions actually received challenging the Secretary’s reapportionment are correct, and I concur in them. I dissent, however, from the majority’s unwillingness to go further, because I perceive an additional difficulty with the Secretary’s August reapportionment plan (the Plan). I *224would direct a change in the abominable boundaries of House District 59 also.
After the Plan is returned by this court to the Secretary for correction, the Secretary appears to have no…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- White v. RegesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Gaffney v. CummingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- McCall v. Legislative AssemblyOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- Hovet v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1971
- Cargo v. PaulusOregon Supreme Court · 1981