Shaw v. Reno
Encyclopedia
Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630
(1993), was a United States Supreme Court case argued on April 20, 1993. The ruling was significant in the area of redistricting
and racial gerrymandering
. The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny
under the equal protection clause
. On the other hand, bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act
. The redistricting that occurred after the 2000 census
was the first nationwide redistricting to apply the results of Shaw v. Reno.
after the 1990 census
. North Carolina submitted to the Department of Justice
a map with one majority-minority black district—that is, a district with a black majority. The Department of Justice felt that the state could have drawn another such majority-minority district
to improve representation of black voters. The state revised its map, but the new plan included a single district that was 160 miles (257.5 km) long, winding through the state to connect various areas having in common only a large black population. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
described the shape of the new district as "bizarre." The court found that if a redistricting map is "so bizarre on its face that it is 'unexplainable on grounds other than race'" it must be held to the standard of strict scrutiny.
, which concerned a similarly irregular district in Georgia, was also decided 5-4, with the majority comprising exactly the same five justices as in Shaw.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1993), was a United States Supreme Court case argued on April 20, 1993. The ruling was significant in the area of redistricting
Redistricting
Redistricting is the process of drawing United States electoral district boundaries, often in response to population changes determined by the results of the decennial census. In 36 states, the state legislature has primary responsibility for creating a redistricting plan, in many cases subject to...
and racial gerrymandering
Gerrymandering
In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to create partisan, incumbent-protected districts...
. The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny
Strict scrutiny
Strict scrutiny is the most stringent standard of judicial review used by United States courts. It is part of the hierarchy of standards that courts use to weigh the government's interest against a constitutional right or principle. The lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or...
under the equal protection clause
Equal Protection Clause
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"...
. On the other hand, bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act
Voting Rights Act
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of national legislation in the United States that outlawed discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans in the U.S....
. The redistricting that occurred after the 2000 census
United States Census, 2000
The Twenty-second United States Census, known as Census 2000 and conducted by the Census Bureau, determined the resident population of the United States on April 1, 2000, to be 281,421,906, an increase of 13.2% over the 248,709,873 persons enumerated during the 1990 Census...
was the first nationwide redistricting to apply the results of Shaw v. Reno.
Factual background and majority opinion
The case involved the redistricting of North CarolinaNorth Carolina
North Carolina is a state located in the southeastern United States. The state borders South Carolina and Georgia to the south, Tennessee to the west and Virginia to the north. North Carolina contains 100 counties. Its capital is Raleigh, and its largest city is Charlotte...
after the 1990 census
United States Census, 1990
The Twenty-first United States Census, conducted by the Census Bureau, determined the resident population of the United States to be 248,709,873, an increase of 9.8 percent over the 226,545,805 persons enumerated during the 1980 Census....
. North Carolina submitted to the Department of Justice
United States Department of Justice
The United States Department of Justice , is the United States federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice, equivalent to the justice or interior ministries of other countries.The Department is led by the Attorney General, who is nominated...
a map with one majority-minority black district—that is, a district with a black majority. The Department of Justice felt that the state could have drawn another such majority-minority district
Majority-minority district
A majority-minority district is a United States congressional district in which the majority of the constituents in the district are racial or ethnic minorities . Whether a district is majority-minority is usually decided by United States Census data.Majority-minority districts are often the result...
to improve representation of black voters. The state revised its map, but the new plan included a single district that was 160 miles (257.5 km) long, winding through the state to connect various areas having in common only a large black population. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
Sandra Day O'Connor
Sandra Day O'Connor is an American jurist who was the first female member of the Supreme Court of the United States. She served as an Associate Justice from 1981 until her retirement from the Court in 2006. O'Connor was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981...
described the shape of the new district as "bizarre." The court found that if a redistricting map is "so bizarre on its face that it is 'unexplainable on grounds other than race'" it must be held to the standard of strict scrutiny.
Dissents
The dissenters noted (1) that the case was brought by white voters challenging the district that made possible North Carolina’s first black representatives to Congress since Reconstruction; (2) that the holding citing the 14th Amendment perversely made redistricting that advantaged blacks subject to more rigorous scrutiny than redistricting advantaging other non-racial groups, though the impetus of the 14th was to provide for equal protection for blacks, and; (3) that allowing race-based voting blocs is distinct from other forms of affirmative action insofar as allowing race-based blocs doesn’t deny another person her rights and privileges, as for example, race-based hiring and retention practices do.Impact
Subsequent decisions on similar issues have made use of Shaw and refined it, though the four dissenters have held fast in their belief that no cause of action exists. For instance, Miller v. JohnsonMiller v. Johnson
Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 , was a United States Supreme Court case concerning "affirmative gerrymandering/racial gerrymandering", where racial minority majority electoral districts are created during redistricting to increase minority Congressional representation.The case was brought to court...
, which concerned a similarly irregular district in Georgia, was also decided 5-4, with the majority comprising exactly the same five justices as in Shaw.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 509
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court
- Wright v. RockefellerWright v. RockefellerWright v. Rockefeller, 376 U.S. 52 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that in cases involving allegations of improper racial gerrymandering, where the evidence was "equally, or more, persuasive" that racial considerations had not motivated the State Legislature, the...
,