Shaw v. Reno was an influential case and received backlash. Nor, because of the distinctions between the two categories, is there any risk that Fourteenth Amendment districting law as such will be taken to imply anything for purposes of general Fourteenth Amendment scrutiny about "benign" racial discrimination, or about group entitlement as distinct from individual protection, or about the appropriateness of strict or other heightened scrutiny. Did North Carolina violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment when it established a second majority-minority district through racial gerrymandering, in response to a request from the attorney general? trailer In the 1992 elections voters in both districts selected black representatives. 78 0 obj That argument strikes a powerful historical chord: It is unsettling how closely the North Carolina plan resembles the most egregious racial gerrymanders of the past. Under the Voting Rights Act, the State had to get approval for any congressional redistricting plan. In Shaw v. Reno (1993), the U.S. Supreme Court questioned the use of racial gerrymandering in North Carolina's reapportionment plan. [9] Some of these methods included poll taxes, which many could not afford, literacy tests, that many could not pass, and grandfather clauses, which stated that one can only vote if their grandfather voted. In this unanimous decision, it was decided that districts did indeed dilute Black votes and therefore did violate the Voting Rights Act. The Equal Protection Clause should only be used to protect those who have been discriminated against in the past, they wrote. AP US Gov - Required Supreme Court Cases | Fiveable <>/Border[0 0 0]/Rect[81.0 617.094 129.672 629.106]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> W(h)ither the Voting Rights Act After Shaw v. Reno alteration would apparently occur because whites in majority-minority districts would be "filler people," (quoting Aleinikoff and Issacharoff 1993, 631), not "expected to com-pete in any . The courts also noted that based on the Voting Rights Act, race can be taken into account when redistricting plans are made, but it cannot be the sole factor when drawing a new district because that would violate the fourteenth amendment. However, five white North Carolina voters filed a lawsuit against federal and state officials. They alleged that the General Assembly deliberately "create[d] two Congressional Districts in which a majority of black voters was concentrated arbitrarily--without regard to any other considerations, such as compactness, contiguousness, geographical boundaries, or political subdivisions" with the purpose "to create Congressional Districts along racial lines" and to assure the election of two black representatives to Congress. "The right to vote freely for the candidate of one's choice is of the essence of a democratic society."Reynolds v. Sims[1964].

Miami Herald Reporters, Kmart Manor Lakes Jobs, Hillside Calistoga Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, Articles S