Kirksey v. Allain Order

    IN, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI 

FILED 
RT 

•_,FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSI SIPPtUtl 0 2 1986 
• JACKSON DIVISION - 

, adultkia A. PERU, CLERK • 

 _MMMY 
HENRY KIRKSEY, et al., 
on behalf of themselves 
and all others similarly 
situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

NATHAN P. ADAMS, JR. AND 
NAT W. BULLARD, 

Plaintiffs-Intervenors, 

WILLIAM A. ALLAIN, Governor of 
Mississippi, et al., 

CIVIL ACTION NO. J85-0960(8) 

Defendants.. 

ORDER 

This civil action is presently before the court on 

the State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Having 

considered the motion, the supporting memorandum, and the 

Plaintiffs' Response to State Defendants' Motion to 

Dismiss and pursuant to the oral ruling announced by the 

court on the record at the beginning of the preliminary 

injunction hearing held in this action on May 27, 1986, 

the court finds that the motion should be granted in part 

and denied in part for the following reasons: 

Because the one-person, one-vote doctrine of the 

Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the 



United States Constitution does not apply to the election 

of state court judges, see, e.g., Wells v. Edwards, 347 F. 

Supp. 453, 454 (M.D. La. 1972) (three-judge court), aff'd 

mem., 409 U.S. 1095, 93 S. Ct. 904, 34 L. Bd. •2d 679 

(1973), the complaint fails to state a claim upon which 

relief can be granted to the extent that it asserts that 

the existing chancery court districts, circuit court 

districts, and county court districts in the State of 

Mississippi are malapportioned and that the resulting 

alleged malapportionment produces population deviations 

among the districts which tend to underrepresent black 

voters. 

In view of the April 3, 1986,.order and the May 21, 

1986, memorandum opinion and order of the three-judge 

court in this action, the motion is without merit to the 

extent that it asserts that Section 2 of the Voting Rights 

Act of 1965, as amended in 1982, 42 U.S.C. S 1973, does 

not cover or apply to the election of state court judges. 

Based upon the authority of the Fifth Circuit's 

decision in Voter information Project, Inc. v. City of  

Baton Rouge, 612 F.2d 208, 212 (5th Cir. 1980), the motion 

is without merit to the extent that it asserts that 

Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment vote dilution analysis 

does not apply to the election of state court judges. 

For these reasons, it is 

ORDERED: 

-2-



1. That, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the 

State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is hereby GRANTED IN 

PART and the plaintiffs' complaint is hereby finally 

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE IN PART to the extent that it 

asserts that the chancery court districts, circuit court 

districts, and county court districts in Mississippi are 

malapportioned in violation of the one-person, one-vote 

doctrine of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth 

Amendment to the United States Constitution and that the 

alleged malapportionment produces population deviations 

among the districts which tend to underrepresent black 

voters; and 

2. That the State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is 

hereby DENIED in all other respects. 

SO ORDERED, on this, the day of May, 1986. 

i/ William H. Barbour, Jr. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE . 

APPROVED AS TO 

Attorney for aintiffs 

Att 

Attorney for State Defendants 

Stat Defendants 

-3-