Correspondence from Allred to Lynn; from Davis to Jones; from Guinier to Jones; from Morissey to Jones

    ,t

riciaAror cAilY o. Al-LltEo
| (rrri or6rntcT
R?. 2. Bor S2O
BuFLrNcrox. N. C. 27216

)irrrtlr 6lr,''lirra (6crrr:r:r[ $sseru[t[g
,$,'lrlrlc Cl1;rrrrlttr

$,tltr pcrlislutir'r'' plui tNirrrl

!l:rh'iql1 27ti I I

August 5, l98l

in
vot

AU

,rrJU i I 'i 'j' r ,: 'iJ|

Lr, ,

',t
!t I

COMMITTEES!

EcoioxY
Frxaxcf
HIcxER EDUcATION
Hus^x REEouncE3
JirtrtctAlaY I
Rrotrrntcrtxo, OEriAtE
sENron CrYtzENg ArtAlRa
SMALL IUtINEtsMs. Theresa Lynn

Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Ten th €.r Pennsy lvan ia Ave. , ii.'vt .
\\'ashington, D. C. 20530

De.rr Ms. Lynn :

It is my opinion that the Congressional Redistricting Plan for Nonth
Canolina ratified bv the laR! session of the Genenal Assembly of North
Cirrolirr.r [.ril:, to corrr;>ly witlr r,('vcri-rl nulings of tlrc Suprcrrr<-: Court of
the United States and is therefore unconstitutional.

ln the Suprcfire Court case of \^Jesl-lr-'rry vs. S;.rnrjers, the court held that
tlrc popul.-rtion of congrcsssional districts in the sarrre state must be
as neanl y equal in population as pnacticable. And, in the case of Kirk-
patrick vs. Pneisler, the court rejected the suggestion that there is 

-a 1>oint.-rt whicl'r l)oprrl;rtion diffcrcnccs a,rlong districts becclnres rrde

rninirrris." The court held that a state nr ust either show that mathematical
equality variances are unavoidable or specifically justify the variances.

The ratified Congressional redistricting plan of l98l for North Carolina
does not meet the nulings above. The ratified plan splits one county
(l"1oore) among two districts. lf counties had been split in each of
the Congressional districts, the districts could have been dnawn more
nearly equal in population and more geographically compact. The
variances in equality of population of the ratified plan are therefore
unjustifiable and could be avoided.

ln City of lvlobile vs. Bolderr, Justice Stevens stated that the constitution-
al test of a redistnicting plan is whether it is: (l ) 'runcouthrrr i.e.,
unusual and "manifestly not the product of a routine on traditional poli-
tical rJt'cir;ion 1" 12) h.-rs "i.r si1;nif ic.rnt irrlvcrse irrrptrct on a rrrinority
tlr'oup irt and (3) is trunsupportec.i by crrr neutral justif icationrr and thc.re-
fr.,re is either irrational on the product of a discrimiealory nrotive.

The ratificd N. C. plun wf l96l
county and the Second district

a

i.

,';
*?-
L.

i,"
:1,,

'O ^ /'lSr.- /
a(-t) 

iy'-t tt

a fisl-rook-like shape
heavy concentnation

',:.?l{^.-N ULA

\r \ED 
\/

to av
of hla

cl udi
ers.

G19

oid
qV

o

ng Durham

8'



c
l'lre districts of the ratified plan are certainly I'uncouthI because they
are not as geographically compact as possible. Alamance county deci-
sions would not be routinety linked with those of Edgecombe County.
Thc rlnoqrirphic configuration of the Second District of the ratified ptan
is such t'hal a Congressman. cannot adequately represent it. Durham
County is dominated by tobacco interests as are most of the othen coun-
ties in the second district except Alamance.
'[lre ratificc,l ptan uf lgUl ltas d significant trtJverse impact on black
voters by diluting their political strength between the Second and FounthDistricts. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits discrimination eithenlry ptlrl)()s(-' or. liy cf fcct -rrcr tlrc Act wds ugllretcl in ttrc case of Cityof Rome, Gc6FEETffiited States.

By placino Alamance and Chstham counties in the Second District and
bypassing Durham county, the black voters of Durham county cannot
combine their voting strength with other Second District counties having
heavy black voter registration to have a greater inf tuence on etectionsfor Congress. ln the case of VJhite vs. Regester, a legislative district-ingplanwiJShcldinvt.rli<lt,eciffievotin9Strengthof
a discrete group.r'

ln h is concurring opinion in C ity of Mol>ilc vs. Rolclr:n, Justicc Stcvens
.rr.guecJtha1thec<rnstituti<rnaldiousdiscrimina-
tion are "applicable, not merely to gerrymanders directed against racial
minorities, but to those aimecl at retigious, ethnic, economic, and poli-
ticirl !Jroups its well.

The ratified plan minimizes the influenle bf the Repubtican pariy in
Alamance County because lhere are no effective Repubtican organizationsin most of the other counties of the Second District of the ratified plan
of 1981.

The most effective Congressional representation witl come from the most
contpact geographical districts possible. The ratified plan does not
achieve this. The Gaffney vs. Cummings opinion stated that districts
may be equal and sffi

I alrr not itn dttorney, but l hopre t have given ociequate reasons whythe Congressional Redistricting Ptan adopted by the North Carolina Gene-ral Assembl), cf l98l should 
?. rejected by the Justice Department.

Cary

Si ncerel y,

CDAr/joa
Allred



SCOTLANT)

o
I i Y BRANCH N.A.A.C.P.
') Box 545

, iilG, N. C. 2E352

June 25, 1981

i'{r. Cerald W. Jones
Qrief Voting Rights,section
1,.S. Dplrl-. 11l- .Irr5t-ice
t'lrrr;lr LnULorrr DC ztJ53O

Dear Mr. Jones:

'l'l 'e st-aLc of Nor[h Carolina lril ,r:cprcs€d a plan to redietrict variouscotrrtties. In too nany citiZeo5 .r1,.inions, if their plan is successful, It
worrld dilute and urrdermind thc , ,t,rity voting strength. Furthermore]
lloircrsone llokt'r und Scotlarrd c'., r,rr :cs fal1 within thi perimeter of the
forest;rted plan. Alsor vast n,, r .gt- of citizens of HokL, Robersonr andScotland cour.r{ i.;'s; percieved r j I ricting to be a tr.eacheroua act of the
whi.tc minorily to rcbell aglirr.r. ilc 1965 Voting Rights Act ancl to enhance
tlrcir votlng strength. To bc .:,., ,, ise, it appears that the plan proposed
by North Carolina and the dei:r<>,.;:,. r:ic party of Scotland Couniy ls motivated
wi-th rrcial overtoires-

il.,: N.A.A.C.P. llra,rch of Scotl ,r.i
r u,ciistricting of Hoke county wiLl:
to be racially motivated and ai r::
r-,trcngtir. Alsor the N.A.A.C.P. '-
,'1 .1,.;.,.r-ilinations and deliber. ,. i,
,:.t f ,,11 iras been of ficially peri,,

C,;unty enters its obJectiou to the
Scotland'county, because tt appears'
:t rrnderminding the uinorlty voting
.rnch of Scotland county request that
..s be withheld until a through invest-
,l

T.{HITES

Di!ring your invest'i1li.ti.on, will -(,,r please consider the 1980 Census reports.
The 21st District population b;.. ;:: and county are aE follows:

COLIiI Y
rl;.;-
Rob e r.sonqcotl an.t

20,393
I01, 577
i2,273

INDIANS
21579

35,511
2,062

CITHIRS

92
487
104

!, ,. , 1,, 81 838

")tt 
, ,'.r0 39 1989

I 1. 161 L8,746

I f ]loke an,l Scotlan<j ,: 'runti eS 1,, r

rcport which is not r(:i)re.:.,'l t{ri '

i'riir,rrity Lotal would on1.;'l,e 2/
ll6, 17(r, of [he three courrtics.
'-h r:se proposed inequalities ari l
.,i I ouf last hope.

, 1 new district, based upon the censuo
.,' the actual registered voters, the

,',. ,]s compared to be preseng existing
,.iore, I say again please investigate

' u; know how we may assist you. You

Sincerely yours,

Oou, @ ea-n")
Rev. Leroy Davlse President
Of Scotland County Branch
NAACP

3O .tu rr lgBl
Jn



//1"^o /*^
Lani Guinier

2 November l98l

Re: North Carolina Section 5
Submission

Ger ry:
-These 

maps-.and charts .were prepared bySteve Suitts, Director, Southern-n.iional
Council to show alternate possibiliIies fordrawing legisLative distriits in seven NorthCarolina counties in the absence of a stateconstitutional prohibition on sub dividingcounties.

Julius chambers and- r,esrie winner, attorneysfor plaintiffs challenging the fggl Hoittrcarolina reapportionment wirr be attending the2230-Thursday_meeting with t{r. Reynolds. Theycan be reached in Charlotte, Nortlr Carolina,
704/375-8461 if there are any changes in
schedule.

!

{
j



A a
Presidenr
Phone (

, Jrmmy Morrrsey
I 1 9) 975-3364

HOKE_COUryry BRANCH OF N.A.A.C.P.

P.O. Box 5OI
Raeford, N.C. 29376

: June 16, I9B1

Goral<l 'h. .ToneiriChlaf of Votlng Rlphts Sectr on
9.S-, Dent. of lusticei'iqshtnnton, I).c : -z6i:lo

l)e aT lvlr. arOngS:
The mlnorlty populatlon of llolrg^.cgynty vrhich con$lcte- o<,r tho pol,ur.ai1in *lth trioir 2$ ni;;i.i'ij,r--:;ii;;"Z"irrlil",rilii::,r,il"the brack popuratlonlor-iior.u Lounti ao'not vrlsh.to'uJ'i"di.tricted fronthe 21st District or llor-trr-'caro11n" ,rrr"i novr stanas vrith *obccon, Iloko,:i:":"::r,T,t.r#Xri:;;rJ; ilil|"i;-";ffiff witlr tr*.." li".u cou,Eics i,_
As it now stalds, vre have the chance to seat a black rcprcsentativc intho I'torth Caroti"" rloru"-oi r,"p"eseataiiiur. Ii-;;..uiJufo be redibtrict_ed to Hoke and scotile; ;h1" iroura .nario, ou. chances, of havlng a blackrepresentatlve fron either-of the ,rr;;i;;ricts. l?e iear that the re-dlstrlctlng 1s aesi6neJ-'il aiu.otve ir,o-irock voting strength.
As you nay aoter 

- 
eYerJrv7here there is a heavy- consentratlon of black orrai'norlty popur-afig3r-it."!-*" the area.-lrr.t_ red.lstrlctlng seens toappear- r,e feel th;t thls is unconstltutl0nal aad unfair.

Eope tbat you
Carol_lnar ard

SJ-ncerely,

will be able to. help us out in the rural south of Northtake rzhatever steps tfr"t-you deem D€c€ssarlro

ITOKE COUNTY BRANCH O!' N.A.A.C.I).

furrra.,llJ n"J,.+c^f
PRBSIDEST 

'

Eg lu,v rcst