PHOENIX — The Arizona Court of Appeals is weighing whether to order the state’s 30 legislative districts to be redrawn, a mov that could put Democrats in control of one or both chambers.

 At a hearing Tuesday, the attorney for a group challenging th existing boundaries told judges that members of the Independent Redistricting Commission did not give sufficient consideration to a legal requirement that they do what they can to creat politically competitive districts. These are districts where th number of registered Democrats and Republicans is sufficientl close so that a candidate from either party has a reasonable chance of getting elected.

 “They did not follow the mandate of the voters,’’ Richard Halloran told the court. The result, according to a coalition of Democrats and Hispanics he represents, is there are only four districts where, under normal circumstances, the general electio could go either way.

 Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Kenneth Fields sided with the challengers, ordering the commission to come up with a ne plan. But the majority of the panel instead chose to appeal.

 Lisa Hauser, the commission’s attorney, said the panel properly interpreted the constitutional requirements.

 Hauser acknowledged the lines could have been drawn in a different way, possibly creating more competitive districts. But she said judges cannot substitute their judgment for that of the commissioners.

 The constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2000 requires the commission to create districts that are generally equal in popular. The districts also must be “geographically compact and contiguous,’’ must “respect communities of interest’’ to the extent possible, and comply with the federal Voting Rights Act which precludes changes that dilute minority voting strength.

 It also requires that “to the extent practicable, competitive districts should be favored where to do so would create no significant detriment to the other goals.’’

 Commission Chairman Steve Lynn of Tucson said that means the other criteria are more important. Based on that, the panel created just four competitive districts.

 But Commissioner Andrea Minkoff sided with the challengers. The Phoenix Democrat said the panel could — and should — have created two or three more districts where Democrats might have a chance of winning.

 She also disputed Hauser’s arguments that judges should automatically defer to the judgment of the commission majority.

 Minkoff said that discretion does not permit her colleagues t all but ignore the requirement to create as many competitiv districts as possible.

 Minkoff acknowledged Democrats did fairly well in the 200 election even under the district lines she does not like. They now control 27 of 60 House seats and 13 of the 30 Senate seats.

 But Minkoff said those results simply reflected a national dissatisfaction with Republicans and does not mean there are enough competitive districts.

 The latest figures show Republicans make up more than 38 percent of registered voters. Democrats constitute 33 percent, with the balance registered as Libertarians or independents.

 Democrats last controlled the Senate in the 1991-92 session, though they shared power with Republicans in a 15-15 split in 2001 and 2002. The House has been in Republican control since the mid 1960s.

 Whatever the court decides ultimately could be legally meaningless after the 2010 election.

 A proposed constitutional amendment would require the next round of redistricting after the 2010 census to specifically make creation of competitive districts a prime goal. That would supersede any court rulings on how important competitiveness is under the current law.

 Backers have until July 3 to gather the 230,047 signatures to put the measure on the 2008 ballot.