A bipartisan duo in the House has introduced legislation to ensure independent redistricting commissions stay in place amid a pending Supreme Court case.

California Reps. Alan LowenthalAlan Stuart LowenthalHouse moves ahead on long-stalled resolution supporting two states for Israelis and Palestinians This week: Impeachment inquiry moves to Judiciary Committee Pelosi calls for Congress to pass resolution supporting two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict MORE, a Democrat, and Dana RohrabacherDana Tyrone RohrabacherGeorge Papadopoulos launches campaign to run for Katie Hill's congressional seat The Hill's Morning Report - Trump, Biden go toe-to-toe in Iowa Ex-GOP lawmakers are face of marijuana blitz MORE, a Republican, crafted the bill ahead of an expected June ruling in the case of Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission that challenges the authority of the state's nonpartisan redistricting commission. 

Power over drawing congressional district lines could be restored to the state legislature if the Supreme Court rules against the Arizona redistricting commission.


Lowenthal and Rohrabacher warned that such a decision would bode poorly for independent redistricting commissions in their state and Arizona as well as Hawaii, Idaho, New Jersey and Washington. District lines drawn by independent commissions would remain intact until the next national census in 2020 under their measure. 

"Our bipartisan bill preserves the will of our constituents who chose to end gerrymandering and take politics out of redistricting," Lowenthal said in a statement. "Instead of putting redistricting back into the hands of special interests, we want to keep the lines drawn by community interests."

"When the voters choose a commission to draw their state’s congressional districts, their decision should be respected," Rohrabacher added.

Twenty members of Congress from California, Tennessee, Illinois, Minnesota, Florida, Arizona, New York, Washington, North Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin signed onto an amicus brief in January in support of the Arizona redistricting commission.

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a separate case to determine how states should be expected to establish districts with balanced populations.

At issue in the case, Evenwel v. Abbott, is whether the 2013 redistricting of Texas state Senate seats based on 2010 census population data adequately reflected the total population and voter population.