COMMENT CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1252 I. BACKGROUND ON PRISON MALAPPORTIONMENT 1255 A. Prison Malapportionment's Proper Framing 1255 B. Sources of Prison Malapportionment 1257 C. Effects of Prison Malapportionment 1259 II. FEDERAL [...], With the 2021 redistricting cycle coming in the wake of the 2020 census, the time is ripe for reformers to tackle prison malapportionment. Prison malapportionment occurs when incarcerated individuals are counted as residents of the jurisdictions where they are incarcerated--rather than where their pre-incarceration homes are located--for purposes of redistricting. This practice thus shifts representational power from the home communities of incarcerated people to the towns where they are imprisoned. Because prisons are largely located in rural towns and communities of color are disproportionately incarcerated, prison malapportionment also results in substantial racially disparate effects. The practice offends the fundamental principle of equal representation and inflicts tangible harm upon incarcerated individuals and the communities they call home. Current scholarship addressing prison malapportionment, however, fails to engage comprehensively with state-law claims. In this Comment, I argue that state law provides a remedy for prison malapportionment that has, until now, gone largely unappreciated. By leveraging states' statutory provisions denning residency and constitutional equal-population provisions, state-court prison-malapportionment litigation can provide a viable path forward even as federal avenues continue to develop.