Memorandum from Guinier to Kellogg Re Amending Complaint in Major v. Treen

Correspondence
October 28, 1982

Memorandum from Guinier to Kellogg Re Amending Complaint in Major v. Treen preview

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Major v. Treen Hardbacks. Memorandum from Guinier to Kellogg Re Amending Complaint in Major v. Treen, 1982. 1aa76479-c903-ef11-a1fd-6045bddc4804. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/d957d0aa-5fec-45c8-850e-fad9b4d3f6f2/memorandum-from-guinier-to-kellogg-re-amending-complaint-in-major-v-treen. Accessed November 05, 2025.

    Copied!

    | 

MEMORANDUM   

October 28, 1982 

Jim Kellogg 

Lani Guinier 

Amending Complaint in Major v. Treen 
  

Preliminary Statement 
  

Discuss what has happened since March re: modifications 

of State House plan following the filing of this action and 
objections by the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 5. 
  

State that: the apportionment of United States House 
continues to have the purpose, result and effect of diluting 
minority voting strength and of denying black citizens the 
ability to use their vote effectively despite the failure of 
the Department of Justice to object under Section 5. 

Include sentence that: allegations are in addition to 
the allegations contained in the Complaint and bring the pre- 
vious allegations into conformity with the June 1982 amendment 
to. §2.0f the Voting Rights Act, 42:U.8.C, §1973, 

Jurisdiction 
  

add: The Court has jurisdiction over the claims in 

the Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§§: 1331 .and 1343 and 424U.S.C.- 81973j.f *Plain- 

tiffs' claims arise from the statutes and con- 

stitution of the United States and are claims 

to enforce statutes and constitutional pro- 

visions which protect civil rights including 

the right to vote. 

Parties 

Do we want to add more parties from the affected Congres- 
sional districts? 

V..&: NT. Facts and Causes of Action 
  

Amend paragraph 19 to state that Justice has approved 

the plan despite its discriminatory purpose, result and effect. 

Amend the complaint at Paragraphs 21 and 26 to allege 
addition to all current allegations that the November 1981  



® 
plan of apportionment for Louisiana Representatives to the 

United States Congress has the purpose and result of abridging 

the right: to vote of black: citizens, of diluting minority 

voting strength and of denying members of the black community 
the opportunity to elect representatives: of their choice in 

violation of Section 2, of the Voting Rights Act, as amended. 

Do we want to consider an additional claim for relief 
re: defendants' affirmative obligation to eliminate the effects 
of past discrimination and to assure that black citizens have 
a fair opportunity to elect representatives of their choice to 
the United States Congress? This claim would be brought pur- 

suant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment, 

the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 

the Fifteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §1981 and §2 of the Voting 

Rights Act as amended. 

VIII. Prayer for Relief 
  

Add... as follows: 

1. Grant the relief prayed for in the Complaint; 

2. Declare that the apportionment of the Louisiana 

Legislature Act 20 of the First Extraordinary 

Session of 1981 has the purpose, result and 

effect of abridging the right of black citizens 

to vote, of diluting minority voting strength, 
and of denying black citizens the opportunity 
to elect representatives of their choice in 
violation of §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 
1965 as amended, 42 U.S.C. 81973, in violation 

of the Thirteenth (?), Fourteenth, Fifteenth 
Amendments to the United States Constitution and 

in‘violation of 42: U.S.C. $1981 and enjoin defen- 

dants from participating in, supervising, con- 

ducting or certifying the results of any election 

pursuant to this apportionment in the future 

which has the purpose, result or effect of 

diluting the voting strength of black citizens. 

(If ‘we include additional affirmative claim for 
relief). Declare that defendants have an affirma- 
tive duty to eliminate the effects of past pur- 
poseful discrimination and to assure that plain- 

tiffs and other black citizens of Louisana have 
a fair opportunity to elect representatives of 

their choice to the:Unlited States Congress;  



# » 

further declare that Act 20 does not afford 

plaintiffs and other black voters a fair 

opportunity to elect representatives of their 

choice in violation of §2 of the Voting Rights 

Act of 1965 as amended, the Thirteenth, 

Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments ... and 
enjoin defendants from participating in, 
certifying ... any apportionment in the future 

which does not eliminate the effects of past 
purposeful discrimination. 

Award the costs of this action, including 

reasonable attorneys' fees, to plaintiffs; and 

Grant such other and further relief as may be 
just and appropriate.

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.