Correspondence from Lani Guinier to Finance Re Harris v. Graddick

    00
SUITE 4OO . 14(X) FYE STREET, NORTHWEST O

LAWYERS' COMMITTEE
FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER I.AW

WASHINGTON, O.C. 20q15 o PI{ONE (zot') 371-1212

CABI-E ADORESS: ljwClv, WASHINGITON, D.C.

February 15, 1984

Dear Colleague in the Voting Rights Struggle:

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is
hostj.ng a Voting Rights Conference to discuss and share
Iegal strategies for overcoming discriminatory barriers to
minorj-ty registration and voting under the ne!', Section 2 of
the Voting Rights Act. The theme of the conference will be:
"Enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. " The con-
ference is scheduled for Frid,ay, l,larch 23, and Saturday,
March 24, at the Fairmont Hotel in downtown New Orleans,
Louisiana. We are scheduling conference sessions to begin
with conference registration at 1:00 p.m. on llarch 23 and
to continue to 5:30 p.m., and from 9:00 a.m. on March 24
to 5:30 p.m.

We would like to extend a cord,ial invitation to you
and any interested persons you would' like to invite to
attend this important conference.

lluch has happened since our last conferences to d,iscuss
the 1982 amendments to, and extension of, the Voting Rights
Act. Across the country there have been a number of challenges
to the constitutionality of the 1982 amendment to Sectj.on 2

of the Act, which eliminated the requj.rement of proving dis-
criminatory intent. None of these challenges have been
successful at the District Court level, but no appellate
court has yet ruled on thj.s issue. In a number of instances,
mj.nority voters have been successful in challenging at-large
elections schemes and racially gerrymandered redistricting
plans.

More than 20 cases have been set,tled or sron under the
new Section 2 standard, and we would like the lawyers,
expert witnesses, and others who have been involved in those
cases to share their successfu] litigation strategies with
others who have been, oE plan to be, involved in similar
cases. We hope to desJ.gn the conference Program to maximize
the exchange of views and information between panelists and



LAwYERS' coMMrrrEE FoR crvrl 
lHrs

To: Colleague in the. . - 'February 15, 1994
Page two

UNDER LAW

Voting Rights Strugg
o
1e

conference participants, and we have included a crinicalsession at the end to allow conference participants todiscuss problems they have encountered in theii individ,ualcases.

we will also have a packet of conference materialswhich will include model pleadings, unreported section 2cases, expert witness reports, and briefing materials,to assist in voting rights litigation.
r am enclosing a tentati.ve conference progrErm which,

rrre hope, addresses current issues in voting-riirrts litigatj.on.
We hope you will be abLe to attend to share your

successes and problems. rf you would like to attEnd, preasecontact Patricia llanrahan (202/371-LZl2l immediately andreturn the enclosed registration form directly to tireFairmont Eote1, University p1ace, New orleansl r,a 70140,by February 23. we look forward to seeing you in New orleans.
Yours ,very truIy,

Frank R. Parker
Director, Voting Rights
Proj ect

FRP: d,m
Enclosures



TENTATI\E AGENDA

Fairmont Hotelr New Orleans, LEr., Mareh 2j-24, 1984

VOTTUC RIGHTS CONFERENCE:

Fridalz, March 23, 1984

1:00 p.m. to I:30 p.m.

1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

3: 30 p.m- to 3: 45 p.m.

3:45 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.

Saturday, March 24, 1984

9:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

12 : 30 p.m. to 1: 45 p. m.

1:45 p.m. to 3:45 p.m.

3:45 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

"Enforcing Section 2 of the
Voting Rights Actn

Registration

Panel Discussion--Section 2

Break

Panel Discussion--Provinq a Section

Coffee and Danish

Lunch

Panel Discussion--Procedures for

Break

Clinical Session--Discussion of
problems encountered in inoividual
cases

Overview

Legislative llistory of Section 2 as Amended in 1982
Challenges to the Constitutionality of Section 2
Scope of Section 2 Coverage--Challenging

At-Large Elections
Gerrymandered Redistricting Plans

- Discriminatory Voting and Voter Registration
Procedures

Discovery in a Section 2 Case
Proving Racial Bloc Voting
Using 1980 Census Data to Prove Socio-Economic
Disparitj.es

Using Content Analysis to Prove Racial Campaigning
Proving Unresponsiveness

6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Cocktails and Reception

The. Elements of a Section 2 Redistricting Case
Proving Vote Dilution in Redistricting
What Section 2 Elements of Proof Are Relevant
Analysis of Successes: Ma'ior v" Treen (Louisiana
congressional redistricting) ; Brooks v. Winter
.(I{ississippi congressional redistricting) ; Gingles
v. Ed,misten (North Carolina legislative reapportionment)

Settlinq Cases and Remedies

Legislative Plans vs. Cour---Ordered Fians
Forms for Settlement Orders
Does the Prohibition Against Proportional Representation
Prevent Minoritj-es Getting Effective Relief?

ving a Section


	58e 42
	58e 42
	58e 43

	58e 44