U.S. Code » Title 2 » Chapter CHAPTER 1— ELECTION OF SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES

2 U.S.C. § 2c

Number of Congressional Districts; number of Representatives from each District

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 2 CasesGoogle Scholar

In each State entitled in the Ninety-first Congress or in any subsequent Congress thereafter to more than one Representative under an apportionment made pursuant to the provisions of section 2a(a) of this title, there shall be established by law a number of districts equal to the number of Representatives to which such State is so entitled, and Representatives shall be elected only from districts so established, no district to elect more than one Representative (except that a State which is entitled to more than one Representative and which has in all previous elections elected its Representatives at Large may elect its Representatives at Large to the Ninety-first Congress).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1971–2024 · leading case: Branch v. Smith
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Branch v. Smith (2003) scotus · cites it 9× “We must decide whether, as cross-appellees contend, the District Court was governed by the provisions of 2 U. S. C. § 2c; or, as cross-appellants contend, by the provisions of 2 U.”
Alexander v. Taylor (2002) okla · cites it 8× “¶ 2 Title 2 U.S.C. § 2c (2000) provides as follows: In each State entitled in the Ninety-first Congress or in any subsequent Congress thereafter to more than one Representative under an apportionment made pursuant to the provisions of section 2a(a) of this title, there shall be…”
People Ex Rel. Salazar v. Davidson (2003) colo · cites it 5× “Congress disagreed, and in 1967 enacted 2 U.S.C. § 2c, which onee again required single-member congressional districts.”
Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004) scotus · cites it 2× “See 2 U. S. C. § 2c. Recent history, however, attests to Congress's awareness of the sort of districting practices appellants protest, and of its power under Article I, § 4, to control them.”
Session v. Perry (2004) txed · cites it 6× “[6] 2 U.S.C. § 2c (2003). [7] U.S. CONST. art.”
League of Women Voters of PA v. Cmwlth (2018) pa · cites it 2× “The Court observed that Congress enacted 2 U.S.C. § 2c to require single-member congressional districts, the boundaries of which "shall be established by law.”
Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) scotus “2 U.S.C. § 2c.) See Vieth , 541 U.S. at 276 , 124 S.”
Common Cause v. Rucho (2018) ncmd · cites it 3× “" 2 U.S.C. § 2c. Consistent with that statutory obligation, our invalidation of the 2016 Plan as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander in no way impacts North Carolina's authority-indeed, statutory obligation-to draw a congressional redistricting plan using single-member…”
Lyman v. Baker (2020) ca1 “See 2 U.S.C. § 2c. That change went into effect beginning with the ninety- first congress, which convened the year after Williams was decided.”
Carstens v. Lamm (1982) cod · cites it 3× “2 U.S.C. § 2c (1979) 4 ; Colo.Const. art.”
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry (2006) scotus “581, 2 U. S. C. §2c; Branch v. Smith, 538 U. S.”
Whitcomb v. Chavis (1971) scotus · cites it 2× “581 , 2 U. S. C. § 2c (1964 ed., Supp. V). Hawaii was the only State to take advantage of this exception.”
Show all 46 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.