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 December 04, 2025.
Copied!
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