Order

Public Court Documents
April 21, 1998

Order preview

3 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Cromartie Hardbacks. Order, 1998. 7cbc5f01-e30e-f011-9989-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/68b93d85-1996-4744-810d-d0acb1448fe3/order. Accessed October 05, 2025.

    Copied!

    FROM NC AG SPECIAL LITIGATION 919-716-6763 85.14.1998 15:31 

  

IN TEE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

EASTERN DIVISION 

No. 4:96-CV=-104-BO(3) 

MARTIN CROMARTIE, et al,, FILED 
Plaintiffa, APR 2 131998) 

v. OAVIL vy, Dang : Q R DER US. DSTRICT Gor 
JAMES B. HUNT, JR., in E DIST. NG. Gap 
hie official capacity as 
Governor of the State of 
North Carolina, et al. 

) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 

Defendants. ) 

) 
  

This matter ie before the Court on Defendants' Motion to 

Recongider the Court's prior Ordex denying Defendants' Motion to 

Stay. Defendants now request that the Court modify its 

injunction entered April 3, 1998, to permit primary elections to 

proceed on May 5, 1998, in those congressional districts which 

will not he affected by the redrawing of the Twelfth 

Congressional District under the 1997 North Carolina 

Congressional Redistricting Plan. 

Following a hearing on March 31, 1998, in this matter, the 

Court issued an Order and Permanent Injunction on April 3, 1998, 

granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to the 

Twelfth Congressional District and granting a permanent 

injunction enjeining Defendants from conducting any primary or 

general election for congressional offices under the current. 

redistricting plan. ‘Defendants requastad that the Court stay the 

 



FROM NC AG SPECIAL LITIGATION. 919-716-6763 85.14.1998 

Order of April 3 and permit congressional elections under the 

1997 Congressional Redistricting Plan. That motion was danied on 

April 6, 1998. Dafandants algo filed with the Supreme Court of 

the United States an Emergency Application for Stay, which was 

denied by the Supreme Court on April 13, 1998. Defendants filed 

tha instant motion on April 17, 1998. Plaintiffs have submitted 

a memorandum in opposition to Defendants’ current motion. 

Dafeandante requast a stay of the Court's injunction to allow 

primaries to proceed in those congressional districts "which will 

not be affected [sic] by redrawing District 12." OQranting 

Dafendante' instant motion would prevent, for all practical 

purposes, the North Carolina General Assembly from changing the 

boundaries of the allagedly unaffected congressional districts in 

the course of redrawing District 12. Defendants imply that the 

constitutional defects in tha 1997 Congressional Redistricting 

Plan can be fixed by merely changing the boundaries of District 

12 and those districts immediately surrounding it. Defendants 

make this assertion without having presented a proposed plan. 

further, Defendants! assertion ignores the Court's instruction to 

the Dafendants that they must redraw the congressional districts 

with race-neutral principles in mind, considering traditional 

districting criteria such as contiguity, community of interest, 

and compactness. 

In consideration of the parties' arguments, the Court hereby  



FROM NC RE SPECIAL LITIGATION 919-716-6763 85.14.1998 15132 

DENIES Dafendants' Motion to Rsconsider a stay of its April 3, 

1998, Order. 

SO ORDERED. 

MT 
This a0 day of April, 1998. 

SAM J, ERVIN, III 
United States Cirxcult Judge 
TERRENCE W. BOYLE ; 
Chief United States District Judge 
RICHARD L, VOORHEES 
United States Digtrict Judge 

rarest fd [1 
TERRENCE W. BOYLE ) 
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.