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 December 05, 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