Help End Prison Gerrymandering Prison gerrymandering funnels political power away from urban communities to legislators who have prisons in their (often white, rural) districts. More than two decades ago, the Prison Policy Initiative put numbers on the problem and sparked the movement to end prison gerrymandering.

Can you help us continue the fight? Thank you.

—Peter Wagner, Executive DirectorDonate

Quick-reference chart: State reforms ending prison gerrymandering.

Nineteen states have now ended various aspects of prison gerrymandering, and each charts a slightly different path to achieving that goal. We put together this quick-reference chart to help advocates sift through the substantive (but not always substantial) differences between the states' laws, but for convenient comparison, we also include states that achieved reform through other channels:

—Aleks Kajstura
last updated July 3, 2024

Does the legislation address:
State Legislative history Statutory reference Congressional districts? State legislative districts? County government districts? City/Town council districts? School Board districts? Is the legislative solution mandatory? What types of facilities are covered by the legislation? How does the state count people with unknown or out-of-state addresses?
Sample Model Legislation Model Statute No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State, Federal Counts at-large
California AB 420 (2011)
AB 1986 (2012)
AB 2172 (2018)
AB 849 (2019)		 Cal. Elec. Code § 21003 (general provisions), § 21500 (counties), § 21601 (general law cities), and § 21621 (chartered cities) Yes Yes Yes Yes No Congressional - Yes (AB 420)
State - Citizens Redistricting Commission votes to adopt legislative recommendation (AB 420)
Counties - Yes (AB 849)
Cities/Towns - Yes (AB 849)		 State Counts at-large
Colorado HB 20-1010 (2020)
SB 02-007 (2002)
HB 04-1230 (2004)		 Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-2-902; § 2-2-901; § 30-10-306 (1), (2), (4); § 30-10-306.7; § 22-31-105(2) and (7)(a); § 22-31-109; § 22-31-110(1)(b); and § 22-31-105(6.5) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Congressional - Contested, the Congressional Commission voted not to use the adjusted data (HB 20-1010)
State - Yes, and the State Commission voted to use the adjusted data (HB 20-1010)
Counties - Yes (SB 02-007)
School Boards - Yes (HB 04-1230)		 State, Federal Counts at the facility location
Connecticut SB 753 (2021) Public Act No. 21-13 No Yes County government doesn't exist in Conn. Yes No State - Yes
Cities/Towns - Yes		 State, Federal1 Counts at-large. All people serving LWOP are counted at the location of the facility regardless of their home address.
Delaware HB 384 (2010), SB 171 (2021) Del. Code Ann. tit. 29 § 804A N/A Yes No No No State - Yes (HB 384) State, Federal2 Counts at facility location (SB 171)
Illinois HB 3653 (2021)
HB 1496 (2023)		 Public Act No. 101-0652 (TBD)
730 ILCS 205/2-10
730 ILCS 5/5-4-1
730 ILCS 5/3-5-1		 No Yes No No No State - Yes (HB 3653) State, Federal Counts at-large
Maine LD 1704/HP 1093 (2023) 21-A MRSA §1208 Yes Yes No No No Yes State Does not count toward population total of any district.
Maryland HB46/SB400 (2010) Md. Code Ann. Elec. Law § 8-701, and Md. Code Ann. State Gov't § 2-2A-01 and Md. Code Ann. Local Gov't § 1-1307 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Congressional - Yes
State - Yes
Counties - Yes
Cities/Towns - Yes		 State, Federal Counts at the facility location
Massachusetts [redistricting committee action] N/A Yes3 Yes4 No No No No
Michigan These sections were last amended by acts in 1966. Mich. Comp. Laws § 46.404(g)
Mich. Comp. Laws § 117.27a(5)		 No No Yes Yes No Counties - Yes (except fails to address federal facilities) (§ 46.404(g))
Cities/Towns - Yes (except fails to address federal) (§ 117.27a(5))
 State N/A
Minnesota HB 4772 - Art.5 §2 (2024) TBD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State, Federal Counts at-large
Montana SB 77 (2023) TBD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State, Federal, Regional, Private Counts at-large
Nevada AB 450 (2019) Nev. Rev. Stat. § 218B.080 and § 218B.105; §§ 218B at 218B.010 and 218B.050; § 209 at 209.131; § 304 at 304.065 and 304.060; and § 396 at 396.0414 and 396.031. Yes Yes No No Board of Regents (higher ed.) Congressional - Yes
State - Yes
School Boards - Yes, but as to Board of Regents only		 State Not specified by statute
New Jersey S758 (2020)
A698/S3964 (2021)		 N.J. Stat. Ann. § 18A:13-8 (see also Board v. New Jersey, 372 N.J. Super. 341, 858 A.2d 576 (2004)), and § 52:4-1.1, § 52:4-1.2, § 52:4-1.3, § 52:4-1.4, and § 52:4-1.5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Congressional - Yes (A698/S3964)
State - Yes (S758)
County - Yes (A698/S3964)
City/Town - Yes (A698/S3964)
School Boards - Yes (A698/S3964)		 State, Federal Counts at-large
New York Part XX of the revenue budget (A9710D/S6610C) and technical amendment, A11597/S8415 (enacted in 2010) N.Y. Correct. Law Section 71(8), adding N.Y. Legis. Law Section 83-m(13), and N.Y. Mun. Home Rule Law Section 10 (13) No Yes Yes Yes No State - Yes
Counties - Yes
Cities/Towns - Yes		 State, Federal Counts at-large (all people in federal facilities are counted at-large)
Pennsylvania [redistricting commission action] N/A No Yes No No No
Rhode Island [redistricting commission action] N/A No Yes No No No
Tennessee SB1811/HB2053 (2016) Tenn. Code Ann. § 5-1-111 No No Yes No No Counties - No (explicitly permitted, but not required) All correctional institutions N/A
Virginia HB 1339 (2013)
HB 1255/SB 717 (2020)		 Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-304.04, § 24.2-314, § 53.1-52, § 24.2-304.1, § 30-265, and § 53.1-10 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Congressional - Yes (HB 1255/SB 717)
State - Yes (HB 1255/SB 717)
Counties - Yes (HB 1255/SB 717)
Cities/Towns - Yes (HB 1255/SB 717)		 State, Federal, and Local Counts at the facility location
Washington SB 5287 (2019) Wash. Rev. Code § 44.05.140 and § 4.05.090. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State adult, Juvenile Counts at the facility location

Footnotes

  1. Connecticut is one of six states with integrated jail and prison systems and while its redistricting statute applies to people in state prisons, in Connecticut this population includes people who in other states would be classified as being in a local jail.  ↩

  2. Delaware is one of six states with integrated jail and prison systems and while its redistricting statute applies to people in state prisons, in Delaware this population includes people who in other states would be classified as being in a local jail.  ↩

  3. The Massachusetts redistricting commission does not count incarcerated people at home, but it uses the Census Bureau's PL 94-171 redistricting data, table P5, (which reports counts of incarcerated people at the facility) to mitigate the impact of the Bureau's counts. Essentially, the redistricting commission redistricts based on unadjusted Census data, but keeps the reported facility populations in mind to ensure that districts meet population requirements without using the facility populations as padding.  ↩

  4. The Massachusetts redistricting commission does not count incarcerated people at home, but it uses the Census Bureau's PL 94-171 redistricting data, table P5, (which reports counts of incarcerated people at the facility) to mitigate the impact of the Bureau's counts. Essentially, the redistricting commission redistricts based on unadjusted Census data, but keeps the reported facility populations in mind to ensure that districts meet population requirements without using the facility populations as padding.  ↩

Stay Informed

Get the latest updates:


And our other newsletters:







Stay Informed


Get the latest updates:



Share on 𝕏 Donate