Where only two counties in the state possessed populations such that they could legally constitute unitary legislative districts and reapportionment plans were offered in the Legislature to that end, it was "practicable" to establish districts which followed the boundaries of those counties. When the population of a county is such that it can legally constitute a legislative district and it is practicable to do so, the Legislature must establish a district which follows that county's boundaries. Day v. Nelson, 240 Neb. 997, 485 N.W.2d 583 (1992).
The part of the 1962 amendment to this section permitting the crossing of county lines in making reapportionment of legislative districts was constitutional. Carpenter v. State, 179 Neb. 628, 139 N.W.2d 541 (1966).
Changing of boundaries of city did not operate to interfere with power of Legislature to divide state into legislative districts. Buller v. City of Omaha, 164 Neb. 435, 82 N.W.2d 578 (1957).
Where grave, unreasonable and gross inequalities exist between different districts, apportionment will be held void. Rogers v. Morgan, 127 Neb. 456, 256 N.W. 1 (1934).
Legislature may only redistrict itself once every ten years. Exon v. Tiemann, 279 F.Supp. 603 (D. Neb. 1967).
Crossing of county lines in making reapportionment of legislative districts was permissible. League of Nebraska Municipalities v. Marsh, 253 F.Supp. 27 (D. Neb. 1966).
Portion of 1962 amendment to this section providing for not less than twenty and not more than thirty per cent weight to be given to area in making apportionment for legislative districts was unconstitutional. League of Nebraska Municipalities v. Marsh, 232 F.Supp. 411 (D. Neb. 1964).
Federal court would not interfere with submission to electors of 1962 amendment to this section. League of Nebraska Municipalities v. Marsh, 209 F.Supp. 189 (D. Neb. 1962).