Plaintiffs’ attorney Robert Thomas, in arguing his case, appears to be confusing the judges.

At one point, Judge McKeown tells Thomas: “That’s abstract mumbo jumbo.” That elicits polite laughter from the gallery.

He was trying to explain what he saw as a three-part test established in Burns v. Richardson.

Thomas argued that when the state adopts an alternative population base for reapportionment, the state has an obligation to say how that alternative stacks up to a constitutionally permissible population base.

Seabright at one point interrupted: “What the heck is a permissible population base?”

Kobayashi, too, chimed in along the same lines, telling Thomas: “The problem I’m having is you’re equating ‘permissible’ with total population.”

— Nanea Kalani