Gaffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735 (1973), is a Supreme Court decision upholding statewide legislative apportionment plans for Connecticut.

It observed that "the States have made virtually no attempt to justify their failure 'to construct districts ... as nearly of equal population as is practicable."

The plan for the assembly, respecting the township boundaries as required by the state constitution, had a mean deviation of 1.9%, with the maximum difference between districts 7.83%.

Democrats alleged the plan amounted to a political gerrymander and was biased in favor of the Republican Party.

[2]For the past fifty years, the two principal guidelines for determining whether a state redistricting plan is fair are: One man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's[2]A State must make an honest and good faith effort to construct its districts as nearly of equal population as is practicable, but that absolute equality was a practical impossibility.