Attorney Notes Page 23
Working File
January 1, 1983

Cite this item
-
Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Working Files - Guinier. Attorney Notes Page 23, 1983. 69a95948-e092-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/84568226-b9d4-4926-b0f5-b713a2c895dc/attorney-notes-page-23. Accessed April 07, 2025.
23 have influence over the whole delegation under the at large system, SG Br. 21-22, rings hollow. Because single shot votingr or voting for substantially less than a fu11 slate, is necessary, but not suffi- cient, for black citizens to have any chance to elect the candidate of their choice, they are required to give up the ability to have any influence over the white candidates who are elected. White citizens as a grouP, are never in this position since no candidate, white or bIack, can get elected without substantial white support. Thus, the district courtrs finding that leveI of racially polarized action is such that blacks must "forfeit by practical necessity their right to vote for a full slate of candidates" J.S. App. 41a, provides one of the bases for the ultimate finding that polarized voting i l