341:
court issued its ruling in August 2017. It ruled that the 2011 redistricting map violated either the VRA or the
Constitution or a combination of both, and because the state used the maps proposed by Texas federal district court based on the original state maps following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling as the basis for the 2013 redistricting, that these were also similarly flawed. The court ordered the Texas governor to call a special meeting of legislators to redraw the maps in a timely manner, but the state instead turned to the U.S. Supreme Court to appeal the opinion, as well as to freeze the Texas federal district court's order to redraw the maps due to nearness of the 2018 elections. In a 5–4 decision split between the conservative and liberal justices, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed in September 2017 to freeze the redistricting order, and hear the case in January 2018.
327:
maps. The Texas federal district court used the state-derived maps as a starting point and issued their new maps by
February 2012. Separately, the D.C. federal district court continued the evaluation of the redistricting maps, and ruled that all three redistricting maps provided by the state for preclearance did not meet the requirements for Section 5 of the VRA by August 2012. The judges determined that the state had not been able to prove that the redistricting plan was developed without intentional discrimination. Due to timing with the 2012 elections to be held in November, Texas continued to use the Texas federal district court-derived maps.
350:
considered unconstitutional, whether the Texas federal district court had ruled appropriately in challenging specific district lines identified in the 2013 maps, and whether the Texas federal district court had authority to demand the rapid redistricting session. The Court itself further considered if they had jurisdiction on the case, given that their action to freeze the Texas federal district court's ruling could have been seen as premature. Oral arguments were heard on April 24, 2018, with observers stating that the judges appeared to be split along conservative and liberal lines.
31:
380:. "Whenever a challenger claims that a state law was enacted with discriminatory intent," Justice Samuel Alito stated in the opinion of the Court, "the burden of proof lies with the challenger, not the State." Although there was evidence of discrimination by the state in the past, this past discrimination was not sufficient to undermine the good faith presumption. "This means that the plaintiffs challenging a redistricting plan still have to show that the legislature intended to discriminate when it enacted the current plan."
323:. The Texas federal district court heard arguments in this case, but held off ruling until the preclearance was completed. However, with the 2012 elections nearing, the District of Columbia federal district court recognized it would not be able to complete the preclearance in time. The Texas federal district court, using proposals from parties in the current Section 2 case, developed the three interim district plans for the state's congressional and legislative districts by November 2011.
1591:
405:
to be underrepresented in the political process." Justice
Sotomayor also accused the court of running interference for racists by "blind itself to the overwhelming factual record" to let Texas use maps that, "in design and effect, burden the rights of minority voters." Justice Alito, Justice Sotomayor wrote, is "just flat wrong," relying on "a selective reading" of the facts to ignore clear evidence of "racial discrimination."
1603:
1615:
505:'s gerrymandering decision, the Court holds that past discrimination by states—even at its boldest and most naked—is not really a consideration in assessments of current policies. This part is crucial, because in an era where crafty state politicians have moved toward race-neutral language that clearly still seeks to disenfranchise people of color, a certain default suspicion by federal courts and the
1324:
458:: "Alito's argument, in other words, is that the 2013 maps weren't enacted to preserve a racial gerrymander; they were enacted to shut down litigation challenging a racial gerrymander. And this distinction is sufficient to cleanse the state legislature of any allegation of racism. It's as if the school districts on the losing end of
462:(1954) had passed a new law recreating the same racially segregated schools that were challenged in the Brown litigation, but claimed that these segregated schools should be upheld because the new law had a legitimate purpose — to bring the litigation challenging public school segregation to an end as expeditiously as possible."
421:
encompasses two separate parts which are designed to protect against voting discrimination. Election laws enacted with racially discriminatory intent are prohibited by the first part. The second part is a prohibition of any voting procedure that "results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any
336:
that the means of which states were determined to have preclearance of voter-related laws was unconstitutional, eliminating the need for Texas to seek preclearance of their maps. The state, with only minor changes, adopted all three maps from the Texas federal district court as the permanent maps in
326:
The state, defending its maps, issued an emergency request to the United States
Supreme Court to reject the District Court maps. The Supreme Court agreed to the emergency request, and on January 20, 2012, vacated the maps developed by the Texas federal district court and instructed it to draw up new
404:
criticized the conservative majority. The majority's "disregard for both precedent and fact comes at serious costs to our democracy," she wrote in 46-page dissent. "It means that after years of litigation and undeniable proof of intentional discrimination, minority voters in Texas ... will continue
443:
decision, under which courts must apply a strong presumption that lawmakers did not act with racist intent, makes
Section 2 suits more difficult because "lawmakers enjoy such a strong presumption of racial innocence that it is now extremely difficult to prove that those lawmakers acted with racist
349:
The case presented at the U.S. Supreme Court combines two separate rulings issued by the Texas federal district court on the redistricting maps. The state in their petition asked on several issues, including whether the 2013 maps, adopted from those presented by the Texas
District Court, could be
340:
The original suit in the Texas federal district court continued, with petitioners seeking to also amend the 2013 redistricting maps as part of their complaints, as to prevent these maps to be used in the next set of elections. This case became protracted in the
District Court, but ultimately the
369:, the Court upheld the current redistricting maps as valid districts, outside of one district, Texas House District 90 near Fort Worth, which the court found was an "impermissible racial gerrymander", remanding the case to lower courts to correct the redistricting to eliminate the
432:
decision with the aforementioned second
Section 2 prohibition. This made suits easier for plaintiffs, because they no longer needed to prove racist intent. Plaintiffs must only show that the voting-related law had a disparate negative effect on voters of color.
2446:
1328:
1108:
1465:
428:(1980) made it nearly impossible to win Section 2 suits, because plaintiffs must prove that the lawmakers who passed voting-related laws acted with "racially discriminatory motivation." Congress overrode the
666:
2516:
320:
509:
based on those state politicians' histories has been the main protective force for the minorities' voting rights. That suspicion is gone now, as are all vestiges of
Marshall's intended vigilance."
1223:
852:
706:
2363:
308:
911:
1260:"United States Code section 52 USC 10301: Denial or abridgement of right to vote on account of race or color through voting qualifications or prerequisites; establishment of violation"
2506:
2347:
422:
citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color." These two prongs of
Section 2 are known as the "intent" test and the "results" test. The Supreme Court's holding in
1022:
1880:
494:
303:, requiring the state to redraw both its congressional and legislative districts to incorporate these four new seats. At this time, the Texas state government was controlled by the
1068:
1116:
685:
569:
83:
1434:
501:
no longer a valid justification for proactive restrictions on states, but the Court doesn't necessarily have a role in advancing the spirit of the franchise. Furthermore, with
1499:
2283:
1923:
1419:
1364:
1150:
1473:
2307:
1848:
1368:
1259:
982:
1647:
2470:
2299:
315:(VRA). While the District Court reviewed the maps, some Texas citizens believed the redistricting diluted minority votes and used unconstitutional racial
2511:
1237:
832:
2521:
1289:
860:
2123:
2501:
589:
925:
529:
300:
883:
1187:"Voting Rights Enforcement and Reauthorization: The Department of Justice's Record of Enforcing the Temporary Voting Rights Act Provisions"
1036:
2091:
497:
and arbiters for America's racial injustices." With the three cases together "the Court has established that not only are the legacies of
444:
intent — so difficult that it may be impossible except in the most egregious cases." He compared an argument made by Justice Alito in the
1383:
942:
1082:
506:
2339:
2323:
2131:
1442:
720:
377:
260:
35:
1720:
2382:
2020:
1640:
304:
1186:
1511:
2028:
1816:
1784:
1334:
550:
1343:
1164:
2043:
292:
2251:
2219:
1581:
376:
The court majority stated that state legislatures are entitled to a presumption of legislative good faith, especially in
477:
1768:
1466:"Jurisprudence: Sonia Sotomayor's Dissent in the Big Voter-Purge Case Points to How the Law Might Still Be Struck Down"
806:
791:
1864:
1633:
1263:
454:
996:
772:
2067:
2462:
2083:
524:
418:
414:
397:
312:
284:
272:
757:
888:
424:
2235:
2211:
1752:
1744:
680:
519:
471:
332:
2179:
2035:
112:
2291:
2171:
2147:
1972:
1760:
1301:
67:
63:
1736:
1625:
2012:
1980:
1947:
689:
573:
370:
78:
2227:
1996:
2398:
2115:
2051:
1988:
1840:
1808:
1728:
2414:
2390:
2139:
2107:
2099:
1800:
1776:
1595:
2163:
102:
2275:
2267:
2259:
1899:
1856:
1824:
1792:
1696:
1544:
319:
to define the new districts, violating both Section 2 of the VRA, and filed a separate suit in the
183:
2004:
2454:
1915:
1832:
1672:
449:
2355:
2243:
2187:
1953:
1939:
1907:
1872:
1571:
1413:
1394:
1358:
953:
490:
307:. Initial redistricting maps were completed by the state legislature by 2011, and sent to the
296:
1151:"The Supreme Court will hear a case that could destroy what remains of the Voting Rights Act"
2430:
2315:
2059:
1931:
1704:
1469:
1112:
625:
489:", because these cases "furthered Roberts's mandate to distance the federal judiciary from
2478:
2422:
2075:
1688:
1619:
1553:
486:
401:
389:
203:
179:
171:
1262:. Office of the Law Revision Counsel in the U.S. House of Representatives. Archived from
739:
608:
145:
2438:
576:
564:
316:
191:
1614:
2495:
2406:
1712:
1680:
1657:
1233:
1228:
1160:
1155:
1078:
1073:
992:
987:
921:
916:
692:
498:
466:
436:
351:
264:
1197:
648:
134:
2203:
2195:
2155:
1507:
1438:
502:
393:
366:
215:
195:
163:
1382:
James James Blacksher, Edward Still, Nick Quinton, Cullen Brown, and Royal Dumas.
1602:
721:"Argument preview: Texas redistricting battles return to the court - SCOTUSblog"
207:
142:
131:
853:"Law: Divided Supreme Court Upholds Nearly All Of Texas GOP Redistricting Plan"
291:
was found to have gained more than four million new residents, many of them of
1607:
1032:
1027:
743:
612:
138:
90:
1069:"Chief Justice Roberts's lifelong crusade against voting rights, explained"
1283:
1281:
667:"Texas redistricting discriminates against minorities, federal court says"
2447:
Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
1562:
1336:
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, As Amended: Its History and Current Issues
396:, filed a concurrence asserting that redistricting is not covered by the
1224:"The Supreme Court leaves the Voting Rights Act alive — but only barely"
1023:"Opinion analysis: Texas scores near-complete victory on redistricting"
652:
525:
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a core section of the Act
1109:"Jurisprudence: Neil Gorsuch Declares War on the Voting Rights Act"
884:"Supreme Court rules one Texas district was racially gerrymandered"
288:
268:
807:"Supreme Court appears closely divided over Texas district maps"
1629:
1493:
1491:
590:"Supreme Court throws out court-drawn Texas redistricting maps"
54:
Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, et al. v. Shannon Perez, et al.
30:
912:"Supreme Court splits 5-4 on Texas racial gerrymandering case"
856:
811:
321:
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
465:
Journalist Vann R. Newkirk II asserted in July 2018 that the
439:
journalist Ian Millhiser stated in several articles that the
952:. United States Supreme Court. June 25, 2018. Archived from
707:"Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act"
299:
heritage. This granted Texas four additional seats in the
2364:
Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
2124:
Houston Lawyers' Association v. Attorney General of Texas
1016:
1014:
983:"Justice Alito's jurisprudence of white racial innocence"
773:"Splitting 5-4, Justices Put Texas Redistricting on Hold"
551:"Federal Judges Propose Maps for Texas Legislative Races"
309:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
475:
decision along with the 2018 Supreme Court decisions in
2348:
Wisconsin Legislature v. Wisconsin Elections Commission
1144:
1142:
1140:
1138:
1136:
1134:
1062:
1060:
1058:
1056:
1054:
976:
974:
846:
844:
842:
840:
452:
by Southern States to the 1954 Supreme Court ruling in
2517:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
1881:
Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
493:'s vision of those bodies as active watchdogs for the
1579:
1102:
1100:
758:"Texas House map must be redrawn, federal court says"
2092:
Mississippi Republican Executive Committee v. Brooks
354:
argued the case for the plaintiffs (Perez, et al.).
2374:
1964:
1891:
1664:
244:
236:
228:
223:
152:
123:
118:
108:
98:
73:
59:
49:
42:
23:
1435:"Politics: The Supreme Court Blesses Voter Purges"
947:, Opinion of the Court, Part III A at pages 21-22"
400:. On behalf of the court's four liberals, Justice
232:Alito, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Gorsuch
2284:League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry
1924:League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry
1384:"Voting Rights in Alabama: 1982–2006 (July 2006)"
937:
935:
311:for preclearance as required by Section 5 of the
330:During these events, the Supreme Court ruled in
2308:Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Bd. of Elections
1849:Board of Estimate of City of New York v. Morris
1721:Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. Assembly of Colorado
2507:United States electoral redistricting case law
2383:Chappelle v. Greater Baton Rouge Airport Dist.
1641:
8:
1418:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
1363:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
792:"Supreme Court takes up Texas redistricting"
248:Sotomayor, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan
2471:Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill
2300:Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama
1648:
1634:
1626:
1393:. Protect Civil Rights.org. Archived from
1367:) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
357:The decision was issued on June 25, 2018.
93:714; 2018 U.S. LEXIS 3846; 2018 WL 3096311
20:
626:"Judges Release Texas Redistricting Maps"
2029:East Carroll Parish Sch. Bd. v. Marshall
1817:East Carroll Parish Sch. Bd. v. Marshall
1785:Salyer Land Co. v. Tulare Water District
1540:, 585 U.S. ___ (2018) is available from:
549:Tribune, The Texas (November 17, 2011).
1586:
541:
417:contains a section known as Section 2.
1411:
1356:
756:Tribune, The Texas (August 24, 2017).
530:Voter suppression in the United States
301:United States House of Representatives
1498:Newkirk II, Vann R. (July 10, 2018).
1067:Millhiser, Ian (September 18, 2020).
833:Southern Coalition for Social Justice
365:In a 5–4 decision written by Justice
18:2018 United States Supreme Court case
7:
2044:United Jewish Organizations v. Carey
1107:Stern, Mark Joseph (June 25, 2018).
2252:Reno v. Bossier Parish School Board
2220:Reno v. Bossier Parish School Board
1464:Hasen, Richard L. (June 11, 2018).
805:de Vogue, Ariane (April 24, 2018).
771:Liptak, Adam (September 13, 2017).
709:– via www.washingtonpost.com.
669:– via www.washingtonpost.com.
1658:redistricting in the United States
1149:Millhiser, Ian (October 2, 2020).
981:Millhiser, Ian (August 13, 2020).
665:Barnes, Robert (August 28, 2012).
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
2512:United States Supreme Court cases
2021:City of Richmond v. United States
1769:Hadley v. Junior College District
882:Ebbs, Stephanie (June 25, 2018).
851:Totenberg, Nina (June 25, 2018).
2522:Congressional districts of Texas
1613:
1601:
1589:
1333:Garrine, Laney (June 12, 2008).
1327: This article incorporates
1322:
910:Prokop, Andrew (June 25, 2018).
705:Barnes, Robert (June 25, 2013).
29:
2132:Presley v. Etowah County Comm'n
1433:Epps, Garrett (June 12, 2018).
1222:Millhiser, Ian (July 1, 2021).
1194:U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
2502:2018 in United States case law
1344:Congressional Research Service
1:
2068:City of Rome v. United States
1290:"The Attack on Voting Rights"
644:Texas v. United States (2012)
630:News/Talk 95.1 & 790 KFYO
259:, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a
1572:Supreme Court (slip opinion)
478:Husted v. Randolph Institute
2340:North Carolina v. Covington
2324:North Carolina v. Covington
2084:Escambia County v. McMillan
1865:Tennant v. Jefferson County
1288:Mcdonald, Laughlin (1985).
1021:Howe, Amy (June 25, 2018).
740:274 F. Supp. 3d 624
649:887 F. Supp. 2d 133
609:891 F. Supp. 2d 808
523:(2013) A case dealing with
487:a new era of white hegemony
455:Brown v. Board of Education
261:United States Supreme Court
2538:
1563:Oyez (oral argument audio)
1196:. May 2006. Archived from
460:Brown v Board of Education
415:Voting Rights Acts of 1965
2463:Wittman v. Personhuballah
313:Voting Rights Act of 1965
285:2010 United States census
240:Thomas, joined by Gorsuch
157:
28:
2236:Lopez v. Monterey County
2212:Lopez v. Monterey County
425:City of Mobile v. Bolden
1892:Partisan gerrymandering
1753:Kirkpatrick v. Preisler
1745:Avery v. Midland County
1502:Shelby County v. Holder
681:Shelby County v. Holder
520:Shelby County v. Holder
485:has "set the stage for
472:Shelby County v. Holder
384:Concurrence and Dissent
333:Shelby County v. Holder
2292:Bartlett v. Strickland
1973:Gomillion v. Lightfoot
1391:protectcivilrights.org
1329:public domain material
263:case dealing with the
2180:United States v. Hays
2036:Beer v. United States
1981:Wright v. Rockefeller
1965:Racial gerrymandering
1948:Rucho v. Common Cause
1400:on September 24, 2020
857:National Public Radio
507:Department of Justice
371:racial gerrymandering
89:138 S. Ct. 2305; 201
45:Decided June 25, 2018
43:Argued April 24, 2018
2172:Johnson v. De Grandy
2148:Voinovich v. Quilter
2100:Thornburg v. Gingles
1761:Wells v. Rockefeller
1656:Case law related to
928:on November 9, 2020.
632:. February 29, 2012.
409:Impact and criticism
361:Opinion of the Court
113:Opinion announcement
109:Opinion announcement
2276:Georgia v. Ashcroft
2268:Easley v. Cromartie
2260:Sinkfield v. Kelley
1900:Gaffney v. Cummings
1793:Gaffney v. Cummings
1737:Burns v. Richardson
1697:Wesberry v. Sanders
1304:on October 14, 2016
1300:(5). Archived from
1266:on November 2, 2020
1167:on November 6, 2020
1085:on November 1, 2020
1039:on November 9, 2020
999:on November 7, 2020
959:on November 9, 2020
592:. January 20, 2012.
283:As a result of the
184:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
2455:Shapiro v. McManus
2013:Whitcomb v. Chavis
1916:Vieth v. Jubelirer
1833:Karcher v. Daggett
1673:Colegrove v. Green
790:de Vogue, Ariane.
777:The New York Times
345:U.S. Supreme Court
168:Associate Justices
2489:
2488:
2356:Allen v. Milligan
2244:Hunt v. Cromartie
2228:Abrams v. Johnson
2188:Miller v. Johnson
1997:Connor v. Johnson
1954:Lamone v. Benisek
1940:Benisek v. Lamone
1908:Davis v. Bandemer
1873:Evenwel v. Abbott
723:. April 18, 2018.
491:Thurgood Marshall
398:Voting Rights Act
378:districting cases
252:
251:
2529:
2431:Lance v. Coffman
2399:Quinn v. Millsap
2316:Cooper v. Harris
2116:Chisom v. Roemer
2060:Mobile v. Bolden
2052:Wise v. Lipscomb
1989:Turner v. Fouche
1932:Gill v. Whitford
1841:Brown v. Thomson
1809:Chapman v. Meier
1729:Fortson v. Toomb
1705:Reynolds v. Sims
1665:Equal population
1650:
1643:
1636:
1627:
1618:
1617:
1606:
1605:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1585:
1576:
1570:
1567:
1561:
1558:
1552:
1549:
1543:
1524:
1523:
1521:
1519:
1510:. Archived from
1495:
1486:
1485:
1483:
1481:
1472:. Archived from
1461:
1455:
1454:
1452:
1450:
1441:. Archived from
1430:
1424:
1423:
1417:
1409:
1407:
1405:
1399:
1388:
1379:
1373:
1372:
1362:
1354:
1352:
1350:
1341:
1326:
1325:
1320:
1314:
1313:
1311:
1309:
1294:Southern Changes
1285:
1276:
1275:
1273:
1271:
1256:
1250:
1249:
1247:
1245:
1240:on June 25, 2023
1236:. Archived from
1219:
1213:
1212:
1210:
1208:
1202:
1191:
1183:
1177:
1176:
1174:
1172:
1163:. Archived from
1146:
1129:
1128:
1126:
1124:
1119:on March 2, 2021
1115:. Archived from
1104:
1095:
1094:
1092:
1090:
1081:. Archived from
1064:
1049:
1048:
1046:
1044:
1035:. Archived from
1018:
1009:
1008:
1006:
1004:
995:. Archived from
978:
969:
968:
966:
964:
958:
951:
939:
930:
929:
924:. Archived from
907:
901:
900:
898:
896:
879:
873:
872:
870:
868:
859:. Archived from
848:
835:
830:
824:
823:
821:
819:
802:
796:
795:
787:
781:
780:
768:
762:
761:
753:
747:
737:
731:
725:
724:
717:
711:
710:
702:
696:
677:
671:
670:
662:
656:
646:
640:
634:
633:
622:
616:
606:
600:
594:
593:
586:
580:
561:
555:
554:
546:
305:Republican Party
297:African-American
267:of the state of
153:Court membership
148:(W.D. Tex. 2017)
33:
32:
21:
2537:
2536:
2532:
2531:
2530:
2528:
2527:
2526:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2485:
2479:Moore v. Harper
2423:Lance v. Dennis
2415:Branch v. Smith
2391:Upham v. Seamon
2370:
2332:Abbott v. Perez
2140:Growe v. Emison
2108:Clark v. Roemer
2076:Rogers v. Lodge
1960:
1887:
1801:White v. Weiser
1777:Mahan v. Howell
1689:Gray v. Sanders
1660:
1654:
1624:
1612:
1600:
1590:
1588:
1580:
1574:
1568:
1565:
1559:
1556:
1550:
1547:
1541:
1538:Abbott v. Perez
1533:
1528:
1527:
1517:
1515:
1500:"Politics: How
1497:
1496:
1489:
1479:
1477:
1463:
1462:
1458:
1448:
1446:
1432:
1431:
1427:
1410:
1403:
1401:
1397:
1386:
1381:
1380:
1376:
1355:
1348:
1346:
1339:
1332:
1323:
1321:
1317:
1307:
1305:
1287:
1286:
1279:
1269:
1267:
1258:
1257:
1253:
1243:
1241:
1221:
1220:
1216:
1206:
1204:
1203:on July 9, 2017
1200:
1189:
1185:
1184:
1180:
1170:
1168:
1148:
1147:
1132:
1122:
1120:
1106:
1105:
1098:
1088:
1086:
1066:
1065:
1052:
1042:
1040:
1020:
1019:
1012:
1002:
1000:
980:
979:
972:
962:
960:
956:
949:
945:Abbott v. Perez
941:
940:
933:
909:
908:
904:
894:
892:
881:
880:
876:
866:
864:
850:
849:
838:
831:
827:
817:
815:
804:
803:
799:
789:
788:
784:
770:
769:
765:
755:
754:
750:
735:Perez v. Abbott
733:
732:
728:
719:
718:
714:
704:
703:
699:
678:
674:
664:
663:
659:
642:
641:
637:
624:
623:
619:
602:
601:
597:
588:
587:
583:
562:
558:
548:
547:
543:
538:
515:
483:Abbott v. Perez
411:
402:Sonia Sotomayor
390:Clarence Thomas
386:
363:
347:
287:, the state of
281:
256:Abbott v. Perez
206:
204:Sonia Sotomayor
194:
182:
180:Clarence Thomas
172:Anthony Kennedy
128:Perez v. Abbott
94:
66:
44:
38:
24:Abbott v. Perez
19:
12:
11:
5:
2535:
2533:
2525:
2524:
2519:
2514:
2509:
2504:
2494:
2493:
2487:
2486:
2484:
2483:
2475:
2467:
2459:
2451:
2443:
2439:Perry v. Perez
2435:
2427:
2419:
2411:
2403:
2395:
2387:
2378:
2376:
2372:
2371:
2369:
2368:
2360:
2352:
2344:
2336:
2328:
2320:
2312:
2304:
2296:
2288:
2280:
2272:
2264:
2256:
2248:
2240:
2232:
2224:
2216:
2208:
2200:
2192:
2184:
2176:
2168:
2164:Holder v. Hall
2160:
2152:
2144:
2136:
2128:
2120:
2112:
2104:
2096:
2088:
2080:
2072:
2064:
2056:
2048:
2040:
2032:
2025:
2017:
2009:
2001:
1993:
1985:
1977:
1968:
1966:
1962:
1961:
1959:
1958:
1944:
1936:
1928:
1920:
1912:
1904:
1895:
1893:
1889:
1888:
1886:
1885:
1877:
1869:
1861:
1853:
1845:
1837:
1829:
1821:
1813:
1805:
1797:
1789:
1781:
1773:
1765:
1757:
1749:
1741:
1733:
1725:
1717:
1709:
1701:
1693:
1685:
1677:
1668:
1666:
1662:
1661:
1655:
1653:
1652:
1645:
1638:
1630:
1623:
1622:
1610:
1598:
1578:
1577:
1545:Google Scholar
1532:
1531:External links
1529:
1526:
1525:
1514:on May 2, 2020
1504:Broke America"
1487:
1476:on May 2, 2020
1456:
1445:on May 2, 2020
1425:
1374:
1315:
1277:
1251:
1214:
1178:
1130:
1096:
1050:
1010:
970:
931:
902:
874:
863:on May 2, 2020
836:
825:
797:
782:
763:
748:
726:
712:
697:
672:
657:
635:
617:
604:Perez v. Texas
595:
581:
565:Perry v. Perez
556:
540:
539:
537:
534:
533:
532:
527:
514:
511:
448:decision with
410:
407:
385:
382:
362:
359:
346:
343:
317:gerrymandering
280:
277:
271:following the
250:
249:
246:
242:
241:
238:
234:
233:
230:
226:
225:
221:
220:
219:
218:
192:Stephen Breyer
169:
166:
161:
155:
154:
150:
149:
125:
121:
120:
116:
115:
110:
106:
105:
100:
96:
95:
88:
75:
71:
70:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2534:
2523:
2520:
2518:
2515:
2513:
2510:
2508:
2505:
2503:
2500:
2499:
2497:
2481:
2480:
2476:
2473:
2472:
2468:
2465:
2464:
2460:
2457:
2456:
2452:
2449:
2448:
2444:
2441:
2440:
2436:
2433:
2432:
2428:
2425:
2424:
2420:
2417:
2416:
2412:
2409:
2408:
2407:Utah v. Evans
2404:
2401:
2400:
2396:
2393:
2392:
2388:
2385:
2384:
2380:
2379:
2377:
2373:
2366:
2365:
2361:
2358:
2357:
2353:
2350:
2349:
2345:
2342:
2341:
2337:
2334:
2333:
2329:
2326:
2325:
2321:
2318:
2317:
2313:
2310:
2309:
2305:
2302:
2301:
2297:
2294:
2293:
2289:
2286:
2285:
2281:
2278:
2277:
2273:
2270:
2269:
2265:
2262:
2261:
2257:
2254:
2253:
2249:
2246:
2245:
2241:
2238:
2237:
2233:
2230:
2229:
2225:
2222:
2221:
2217:
2214:
2213:
2209:
2206:
2205:
2201:
2198:
2197:
2193:
2190:
2189:
2185:
2182:
2181:
2177:
2174:
2173:
2169:
2166:
2165:
2161:
2158:
2157:
2153:
2150:
2149:
2145:
2142:
2141:
2137:
2134:
2133:
2129:
2126:
2125:
2121:
2118:
2117:
2113:
2110:
2109:
2105:
2102:
2101:
2097:
2094:
2093:
2089:
2086:
2085:
2081:
2078:
2077:
2073:
2070:
2069:
2065:
2062:
2061:
2057:
2054:
2053:
2049:
2046:
2045:
2041:
2038:
2037:
2033:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2023:
2022:
2018:
2015:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:
2002:
1999:
1998:
1994:
1991:
1990:
1986:
1983:
1982:
1978:
1975:
1974:
1970:
1969:
1967:
1963:
1956:
1955:
1950:
1949:
1945:
1942:
1941:
1937:
1934:
1933:
1929:
1926:
1925:
1921:
1918:
1917:
1913:
1910:
1909:
1905:
1902:
1901:
1897:
1896:
1894:
1890:
1883:
1882:
1878:
1875:
1874:
1870:
1867:
1866:
1862:
1859:
1858:
1857:Cox v. Larios
1854:
1851:
1850:
1846:
1843:
1842:
1838:
1835:
1834:
1830:
1827:
1826:
1825:Ball v. James
1822:
1819:
1818:
1814:
1811:
1810:
1806:
1803:
1802:
1798:
1795:
1794:
1790:
1787:
1786:
1782:
1779:
1778:
1774:
1771:
1770:
1766:
1763:
1762:
1758:
1755:
1754:
1750:
1747:
1746:
1742:
1739:
1738:
1734:
1731:
1730:
1726:
1723:
1722:
1718:
1715:
1714:
1713:Davis v. Mann
1710:
1707:
1706:
1702:
1699:
1698:
1694:
1691:
1690:
1686:
1683:
1682:
1681:Baker v. Carr
1678:
1675:
1674:
1670:
1669:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1651:
1646:
1644:
1639:
1637:
1632:
1631:
1628:
1621:
1616:
1611:
1609:
1604:
1599:
1597:
1596:United States
1587:
1583:
1573:
1564:
1555:
1546:
1539:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1503:
1494:
1492:
1488:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1460:
1457:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1429:
1426:
1421:
1415:
1396:
1392:
1385:
1378:
1375:
1370:
1366:
1360:
1349:September 15,
1345:
1338:
1337:
1330:
1319:
1316:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1284:
1282:
1278:
1265:
1261:
1255:
1252:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1230:
1225:
1218:
1215:
1199:
1195:
1188:
1182:
1179:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1157:
1152:
1145:
1143:
1141:
1139:
1137:
1135:
1131:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1103:
1101:
1097:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1075:
1070:
1063:
1061:
1059:
1057:
1055:
1051:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1024:
1017:
1015:
1011:
998:
994:
990:
989:
984:
977:
975:
971:
955:
948:
946:
938:
936:
932:
927:
923:
919:
918:
913:
906:
903:
891:
890:
885:
878:
875:
862:
858:
854:
847:
845:
843:
841:
837:
834:
829:
826:
814:
813:
808:
801:
798:
793:
786:
783:
778:
774:
767:
764:
759:
752:
749:
745:
741:
736:
730:
727:
722:
716:
713:
708:
701:
698:
694:
691:
687:
683:
682:
676:
673:
668:
661:
658:
654:
650:
645:
639:
636:
631:
627:
621:
618:
614:
610:
605:
599:
596:
591:
585:
582:
578:
575:
571:
567:
566:
560:
557:
552:
545:
542:
535:
531:
528:
526:
522:
521:
517:
516:
512:
510:
508:
504:
500:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
479:
474:
473:
468:
467:Roberts Court
463:
461:
457:
456:
451:
447:
442:
438:
434:
431:
427:
426:
420:
416:
408:
406:
403:
399:
395:
391:
383:
381:
379:
374:
372:
368:
360:
358:
355:
353:
352:Allison Riggs
344:
342:
338:
335:
334:
328:
324:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
278:
276:
274:
270:
266:
265:redistricting
262:
258:
257:
247:
243:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:Case opinions
222:
217:
213:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
173:
170:
167:
165:
162:
160:Chief Justice
159:
158:
156:
151:
147:
144:
140:
136:
133:
129:
126:
122:
117:
114:
111:
107:
104:
103:Oral argument
101:
97:
92:
86:
85:
80:
76:
72:
69:
65:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
2477:
2469:
2461:
2453:
2445:
2437:
2429:
2421:
2413:
2405:
2397:
2389:
2381:
2362:
2354:
2346:
2338:
2331:
2330:
2322:
2314:
2306:
2298:
2290:
2282:
2274:
2266:
2258:
2250:
2242:
2234:
2226:
2218:
2210:
2204:Bush v. Vera
2202:
2196:Shaw v. Hunt
2194:
2186:
2178:
2170:
2162:
2156:Shaw v. Reno
2154:
2146:
2138:
2130:
2122:
2114:
2106:
2098:
2090:
2082:
2074:
2066:
2058:
2050:
2042:
2034:
2027:
2019:
2011:
2005:Ely v. Klahr
2003:
1995:
1987:
1979:
1971:
1952:
1946:
1938:
1930:
1922:
1914:
1906:
1898:
1879:
1871:
1863:
1855:
1847:
1839:
1831:
1823:
1815:
1807:
1799:
1791:
1783:
1775:
1767:
1759:
1751:
1743:
1735:
1727:
1719:
1711:
1703:
1695:
1687:
1679:
1671:
1537:
1516:. Retrieved
1512:the original
1508:The Atlantic
1501:
1478:. Retrieved
1474:the original
1459:
1447:. Retrieved
1443:the original
1439:The Atlantic
1428:
1402:. Retrieved
1395:the original
1390:
1377:
1347:. Retrieved
1335:
1318:
1308:February 26,
1306:. Retrieved
1302:the original
1297:
1293:
1270:November 14,
1268:. Retrieved
1264:the original
1254:
1242:. Retrieved
1238:the original
1227:
1217:
1205:. Retrieved
1198:the original
1193:
1181:
1171:November 14,
1169:. Retrieved
1165:the original
1154:
1121:. Retrieved
1117:the original
1089:November 14,
1087:. Retrieved
1083:the original
1072:
1043:November 14,
1041:. Retrieved
1037:the original
1026:
1003:November 14,
1001:. Retrieved
997:the original
986:
963:November 14,
961:. Retrieved
954:the original
944:
926:the original
915:
905:
893:. Retrieved
887:
877:
865:. Retrieved
861:the original
828:
816:. Retrieved
810:
800:
785:
776:
766:
751:
734:
729:
715:
700:
695: (2013).
679:
675:
660:
643:
638:
629:
620:
603:
598:
584:
579: (2012).
563:
559:
544:
518:
482:
476:
470:
464:
459:
453:
445:
440:
435:
429:
423:
412:
394:Neil Gorsuch
392:, joined by
387:
375:
367:Samuel Alito
364:
356:
348:
339:
331:
329:
325:
282:
255:
254:
253:
216:Neil Gorsuch
211:
199:
196:Samuel Alito
187:
175:
164:John Roberts
127:
119:Case history
82:
53:
15:
746: 2017).
655: 2012).
615: 2012).
337:June 2013.
273:2010 census
237:Concurrence
208:Elena Kagan
143:F. Supp. 3d
141:2017); 274
132:F. Supp. 3d
60:Docket nos.
2496:Categories
1404:October 7,
1207:August 26,
1033:SCOTUSblog
1028:SCOTUSblog
536:References
495:Fourteenth
450:resistance
279:Background
818:April 24,
744:W.D. Tex.
613:W.D. Tex.
469:with its
419:Section 2
139:W.D. Tex.
91:L. Ed. 2d
74:Citations
1620:Politics
1536:Text of
1414:cite web
1359:citation
1123:March 6,
895:June 25,
889:ABC News
513:See also
499:Jim Crow
388:Justice
229:Majority
99:Argument
1582:Portals
1244:July 2,
1234:Vox.com
1229:Vox.com
1161:Vox.com
1156:Vox.com
1079:Vox.com
1074:Vox.com
993:Vox.com
988:Vox.com
922:Vox.com
917:Vox.com
245:Dissent
2482:(2023)
2474:(2019)
2466:(2016)
2458:(2015)
2450:(2015)
2442:(2012)
2434:(2007)
2426:(2006)
2418:(2003)
2410:(2002)
2402:(1989)
2394:(1982)
2386:(1977)
2367:(2024)
2359:(2023)
2351:(2022)
2343:(2018)
2335:(2018)
2327:(2017)
2319:(2017)
2311:(2017)
2303:(2015)
2295:(2009)
2287:(2006)
2279:(2003)
2271:(2001)
2263:(2000)
2255:(2000)
2247:(1999)
2239:(1999)
2231:(1997)
2223:(1997)
2215:(1996)
2207:(1996)
2199:(1996)
2191:(1995)
2183:(1995)
2175:(1994)
2167:(1994)
2159:(1993)
2151:(1993)
2143:(1993)
2135:(1992)
2127:(1991)
2119:(1991)
2111:(1991)
2103:(1986)
2095:(1984)
2087:(1984)
2079:(1982)
2071:(1980)
2063:(1980)
2055:(1978)
2047:(1977)
2039:(1976)
2024:(1975)
2016:(1971)
2008:(1971)
2000:(1971)
1992:(1970)
1984:(1964)
1976:(1960)
1957:(2019)
1943:(2018)
1935:(2018)
1927:(2006)
1919:(2004)
1911:(1986)
1903:(1973)
1884:(2016)
1876:(2016)
1868:(2012)
1860:(2004)
1852:(1989)
1844:(1983)
1836:(1983)
1828:(1981)
1820:(1976)
1812:(1975)
1804:(1973)
1796:(1973)
1788:(1973)
1780:(1973)
1772:(1970)
1764:(1969)
1756:(1969)
1748:(1968)
1740:(1966)
1732:(1965)
1724:(1964)
1716:(1964)
1708:(1964)
1700:(1964)
1692:(1963)
1684:(1962)
1676:(1946)
1575:
1569:
1566:
1560:
1557:
1554:Justia
1551:
1548:
1542:
1518:May 2,
1480:May 2,
1449:May 2,
867:May 2,
742: (
738:,
684:,
653:D.D.C.
651: (
647:,
611: (
607:,
568:,
446:Abbott
441:Abbott
430:Mobile
293:Latino
214:
212:·
210:
202:
200:·
198:
190:
188:·
186:
178:
176:·
174:
130:, 267
68:17-626
64:17-586
2375:Other
1470:Slate
1398:(PDF)
1387:(PDF)
1340:(PDF)
1331:from
1201:(PDF)
1190:(PDF)
1113:Slate
957:(PDF)
950:(PDF)
688:
572:
503:Alito
289:Texas
269:Texas
124:Prior
81:___ (
1520:2020
1482:2020
1451:2020
1420:link
1406:2020
1369:link
1365:link
1351:2017
1310:2017
1272:2020
1246:2023
1209:2018
1173:2020
1125:2021
1091:2020
1045:2020
1005:2020
965:2020
897:2018
869:2020
820:2018
690:U.S.
574:U.S.
481:and
413:The
84:more
79:U.S.
77:585
1608:Law
812:CNN
686:570
577:388
570:565
437:Vox
295:or
146:624
135:750
2498::
1951:/
1506:.
1490:^
1468:.
1437:.
1416:}}
1412:{{
1389:.
1361:}}
1357:{{
1342:.
1296:.
1292:.
1280:^
1232:.
1226:.
1192:.
1159:.
1153:.
1133:^
1111:.
1099:^
1077:.
1071:.
1053:^
1031:.
1025:.
1013:^
991:.
985:.
973:^
934:^
920:.
914:.
886:.
855:.
839:^
809:.
775:.
628:.
373:.
275:.
1649:e
1642:t
1635:v
1584::
1522:.
1484:.
1453:.
1422:)
1408:.
1371:)
1353:.
1312:.
1298:7
1274:.
1248:.
1211:.
1175:.
1127:.
1093:.
1047:.
1007:.
967:.
943:"
899:.
871:.
822:.
794:.
779:.
760:.
693:2
553:.
137:(
87:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.