Court Takes Case on Voting Rights (The New York Times)

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

LDF Attorneys
Cooperating Attorney
- Leslie J. Winner
Organization
- NAACP Legal and Educational Defense Fund, Inc.
Matter
- Gingles
Case
- Thornburg v. Gingles
U.S. state
- North Carolina
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 898d4dea-db92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873

Cite this item

Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Working Files - Guinier. Court Takes Case on Voting Rights (The New York Times), 1985. 898d4dea-db92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/50299dc3-7dfb-4999-9bda-1cd9f0ba256f/court-takes-case-on-voting-rights-the-new-york-times. Accessed April 06, 2025.

Copied!

I COURT TAI(ES CASE

I ott ttoTtNo RIGIITSt_
lN. Carolina Dispute tnvotves

il Proving Bias in Districtingr_
F.

t: ByLTNDAGnEENHousE
L sdrtbrbr{ilYatrm
L' wesnrxcToN, April 29 - The Su-
r--p,reme Cort set the stage today fortb€
Itrgt malor lcgal tcst of tbe ameoded
,..Vodag Rlghts Act, whidr Congress re
i rrote thre yeareago to male it easier
1 to prove tntrtngeoeots of the ruht to
i:VOtt.
i.
' At therrglqg of the Reagan Admlnis-

r tradm, end wer the objectlm of the

'r'NAACP frgal Defense and Educa-
i: donal hmd, the Cort agreed to hear
f an appeal by the State of Norttr Caro
l.-ltna trom a 6Ddtn8 that a lW r€dis-
l' trlcttnS plan vlolated the ner law.

At lssue tn the appeal ts hmv the
courts strould .tnterpret tbe c€ntral
commsnd ol tbe amerded traw: rhat a
vodng procedure "whlch results in a
deolel r aMdgneat ol tbe riSDt of 8ny
dda ol thc Unlted Stat€s to rrde on
aooont ol race c @lor" lr lllqBl.

, C.rntreao ad@ed thts lsnguage in
I qOer o werrule e Srryreme C.oun
I 0eOsio thlt toterpreted tbe ortginal
t' frc Vdng RIStts Act es requiring
L, prof oil lnteadml dtscrtmina6m. lt is
I inucb more difficult to prove discrimi-
L natory lnt€ot tban to tdendly a dis-
r crtmlnatory result. Prestdent Reagan
t :rcsbted the effort to arne-'nd tte law,

" hrt evurtuallyacquiesced tntie lace of
il: biperusan political pressnrre.

fr;
l; Drpute on Seveo lxstrlctt
F' e spcdal thres'Judgp Foderal Dis-
;- trtct C-:ort tn North Csrolioa ruled last
['- rear that the state viotated tte law tn
i.J ihe llG drawn lor seveo state l%lsla-
L-.dvc districB ln respose to the fgl
I ' cersus. Tbe crurt sald tbe redistrtcting
: dlutcd the vilttr8 sttEoslh of the blact
Lr poprlation because, while lt would
?' havc bm feaslble to draw rome dis-
'r,t.trtcts rtO stzable bl,act matoldes, dl
["' Dut or of the cbdl€oged dbtrtctt h8d
I - riltr naloridea.

THB NBW YORK TIMES, TUBSDAY, APRTL
'O'

198.5

" The District Court eedllcally dsa-i vpwed ED lotcodon to turrrrte "prG: portlcDl rrpreseatatlur" to black
,.- voters, taylng lnst€ad that h light of
. the area'a hlstory and ol the reluctance
i ol whltes to \Dte lor blacf candldtt€s,
I changes were rcgulred to order to glve
r, black voterB aD equal opporurntty to
t.,. parttcipqte ln the political ppoess.
!, Ir.the ameoded Vdlag Rlghts Act,
t. CorUress specffied ttrat the law did mt
i 8lve any gn up a rlght to elecdon "ln

numberc equsl to thelr proportlon ln
I the populatlon."
. After recetvlng the irtate's appeal
I last fall, the Stryreme Court asked the
r Justice DepartE€ot for tts views ol theI case. In lts brief fited earlter thls
i month, the departmeot tnfuriated civll
' rights lawye-rs by argutu that the
r lower currt's lnterpretatim of the Vd-
r. tng Rigfts Act was "fundam€ntolly
q flawed."-,' The brlef sald that despite &e Dis-

trict @urt's disevoryd ol a propor-
I tiqlal reprecentatlon standaJd, the
r, decislon tn fact lncorporated sucb a
i standard by lgnorlng the "slgtrlflcait
electoral,gueoess" tbat blact candi-

. dates had adrieved ta the clalleaged
, aistacts. Thc degartmeot eald thaa tD
, five distrlctE, whlch elect a total of tl
, state legislators, flve blacts had Dc€trt
, elected in r€ccot electims. The mly ex-' plamtion lor tbe Dlstrict C$rt's dlsap
. proval of tbese dlstricts, the depsrt-
' memt sald, was ttrat the cqut err(xre

osly believod ln "guaranteed electoral
susoess ln proportton to the blacB per-
omtage of the populadon."

l-nrtor."
I Decar,lhmaburyDv.@gl-ca,

Succcac Tctil€d Modsi
"MiDorlty vpters htrve no rtgit to the

creadon ol safe clectoral distrlcts
: merely because they cottld leasibly be
drawrl" tbe brie{ 8std.

ln rcspdase the NAACP lrgBl De,
lerrse and Educadonal Flurd, repre.

.'aenttng the blact plalntitfs, satd the
, Dtstrlct Corrt hfil pniperly csoducted

i partieoitad "qeoly a[gDed ttseI
[.ihe Srpreme @urt rlth a lurMtcd
i fona by I lorcr cqrrt to bc r dlrcrtr

a "pecreitrating hqupy" tnto the aec.
tonil and radil hlitory of the area,
which the r€c€ot, and modest, blact
8u@ess was mly qre lactor to be coD-
eldered. Slxteea mcmbers ol tbe l7l
member Legtslsture are blact, less
than l0 perceot h a state wltt a 22 per-
ceot black populadoh.

A grurp ol North Caroltns R€Pttbli-
canshled a brtel ln suppct ol tbe plaln'
dffs, ctrarglnS that the Got/€romeot's
brief was t'nDsotttd ard lnconsi$€of'

,.aod was based m a o}'elded prEe€ots-
do of the wldeoce.

Lanl Guinler, tbe laryer for the legel
defense runt wto bandled tb case,
aaid today thst ln bervlew, tDe

l Admtnlstradqr had "*luf,d ttrls case
i as an qporanlty to try to Persuade the
I supreri6 court toeut the Vodng Rig[ts
:. a.i-" she reld lt *as the flrst tlrne ln a
r Jr{rrEuE wr rv5s.
_.. Act.,, Sbe sald tt *as the flrtt ttme lnj Ag. Jr ElU ll ts grs rsD! uE u s

t vodng rl8hts case that tbe Justlce De

;aurO illl b.|sllln d !rll.

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Court Takes Case on Voting Rights (The New York Times)

LDF Attorneys

Cooperating Attorney

Organization

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in