Application for Leave to File Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Excess of the Page Limits
Public Court Documents
July 1, 1985

Cite this item
-
Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Hardbacks, Briefs, and Trial Transcript. Application for Leave to File Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Excess of the Page Limits, 1985. 3ed9123a-d692-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/845b9d4c-4dd3-4a8e-95d0-3a1fcd39aa69/application-for-leave-to-file-brief-for-the-united-states-as-amicus-curiae-in-excess-of-the-page-limits. Accessed April 06, 2025.
Copied!
No.83-1968 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERIVI , 1985 LACY H. THORNBURGH, ET AL., APPELLANTS RALPH GINGLES, ET AL. V. ON APPEAL FROM THE FOR THE EASTERN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AIUICUS CURIAE IN EXCESS OF THE PAGE LIMITS Pursuant to RuIe 33.4 of the Rules of thls Court, the Acting So11c1tor General, oD behalf of the Unlted States, respectfully applles for leave to flIe a Brlef for the Unlted States as Amlcus Curlae 1n thls case 1n excess of the l0 pages provlded for such brlefs under Rule 36.2. we request that 35 pages be alrowed. In thls case, the dlstrtct court lnvalldated a state redlstrlctlng plan on the ground that lt vlolated amended Sectlon 2 of the Votlng Rlghts Act of 1965,42 U.S.C. L973. On Oetober 1, 1984, the Court entered an order lnvltlng the So11cltor General to flIe a brlef expresslng the vlews of the Unlted States ln thls case. We responded wlth a brlef urglng sirmmary afflrmance on two questlons and plenary revlew on two others, and the Court noted probable Jurlsdlctlon on the latter two questlons on Aprll 24, L985. a a I -2- Thls 1s the flrst case 1n thls Court to accord plenary revlew to a dlstrlet courtrs flndlng of a v1olat1on of amended Sectlon 2 of the Votlng Rlghts Act. The Unlted States wlshes to flle a brlef as amlcus curlae ln thls case, addresslng both questlons that the Court has declded to revlew. In vlew of the lntrlcate questlons 1nvoIved, howeverr w€ do not belleve that we can address the merlts 1n a manner that w111 be of full asslstance to the Court ln the page llmlt appllcable under thls courtts Rule 36.2. we therefore respectfully request that a total of 35 pages be allowed 1n our brlef relatlng to thls case. We belleve that that w111 be sufflclent. However, because we w111 f1Ie our brlef ln typescrlpt, 1t ls posslble that our prlnted brlef may exceed our estlmatlon. If lt doesr w€ respectfully request that we be allowed to flle our prlnted brlef even lf lt exceeds the 35 pages we have estlmated. Re spectfully submltted. CHARLES FRIED Actlng Sollcltor General JULY 1985