Page:Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Comm’n.pdf/23

Rh constitutional amendments, in contrast, “the Legislature” has a different identity, one that excludes the referendum and the Governor’s veto. Hawke, see supra, at 16.

In sum, our precedent teaches that redistricting is a legislative function, to be performed in accordance with the State’s prescriptions for lawmaking, which may in­clude the referendum and the Governor’s veto. The exer­cise of the initiative, we acknowledge, was not at issue in our prior decisions. But as developed below, we see no constitutional barrier to a State’s empowerment of its people by embracing that form of lawmaking.

We take up next the statute the Court asked the parties to address, 2 U. S. C. §2a(c), a measure modeled on the Reapportionment Act Congress passed in 1911, Act of Aug. 8 (1911 Act), ch. 5, §4, 37 Stat. 14. Section 2a(c), we hold, permits use of a commission to adopt Arizona’s congres­sional districts. See supra, at 15.

From 1862 through 1901, the decennial congressional apportionment Acts provided that a State would be