Draft Brief of Amicus Curiae, The Honorable James G. Martin, Governor of North Carolina, Supporting Appellees

    IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATE

OCTOBER TERM, 1985

No.

LACY H. THORNBURG, eE aI.,

Appel Ian ts

v.

RALPH GINGLES, €t dI.,

AppelIees

ON APPEAL FROI{ THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

BRIEF OF AI'IICUS CURIAE, THE HONORABLE JAMES G. IqARTTN,

GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA, SUPPORTING APPELLEES

Victor S. Friedman*
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver

& Jacobson
(A partnership which includes
profess ional corporations)

One New York Plaza
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (2121 820-3050

Counsel for Amicus Cur iae

*CounseI of Record



The Honorable James G. Martin, Governor of the state

of North Carolina, submits this brief amicus curiae in support

of the decision of the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of North Carolina invalidating seven of North

Carolina's multimember districts on the ground that those

districts had the effect of diluting black votes in violation

of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1955.

fnterest of Amicus Curiae

The Governor wishes to make clear to the court that

the highest elected official of the State of North CaroIina,

and one with extensive knowledge of and experience in North

Carolina politics, does not share the views of the Staters

Attorney General as set forth in appellant's briefs before the

Court. As a former three-term Mecklenburg County Commissioner

(1966-1972), during which time he was elected Commission

Chairman and served as President of the North Carolina

Association of County Commissioners; a six-term Congressman

(Lg72-1984) from the 9th Congressional District, encompassing

IredelI, Lincoln, Mecklenburg and Part of Yadkin counties; and,

since his election in November 1984, the Chief Executive

Officer of the State, he believes Lhat his views wiII be of

special value to the Court.

The Governor,s interest is two-fold. As a member of a

minority political party in North Carolina (on1y the second

Republican governor in this century), he is well aware of the



disadvantages North Carolina's multimember voting system

creates for any minority grouP where the majority group tends

to vote on the basis of criteria other than the particular

candidate's merits. As the representative of all of the people

of the State, he is keenly aware of the need to eliminate as

quickly as practicable the vestiges of past discr imination and

to bring into the political life of the state all of its

citizens without maintaining or erecting artificial barriers to

full participation of any group. To the extent that

multimember districts create such barriers, and the Governor

agrees fully with the District Court that in the Districts at

issue (if not the entire State) they do, they should be

str icken down.

Argument

we eschew the opportunity to enter the debate over

whether the "clearly erroneous" standard governs this Courtrs

review because Of the Governor's view that, far from "clearIy

erroneousn, the District Court's eSsential findings were

clearly correct. There can be Iittle question that multimember

districts in North Carolina dilute the effect of black voters

wherever there are smaller included districts with clear black

majorities. The election of some blacks to the state

legislature does not detract from the simple, but obvious,

truth that in some circumstances the artificial barrier of



multimember districts can be overcome, not that the barrier

does not exist,.

As the record below amply demonstrates, North

Carolina's multimember districts create additional difficulties

for blacks seeking to participate fully in the Staters

political process. The significantly higher cost of

campaigning in the larger multimember districts ( ), coupled

with the greater difficulty black candidates face in raising

campaign funds ( ) act as further deterrents on black

candidacies. Thus, the significant economic disparity between

whites and blacks in the State exascerbates the otherwise

discriminatory impact of multimember districting.

This administration is committed to opening the

political process to all North Carolinians. In making

appoinLments to State Boards and Commissions, the Governor is

seeking to attract qualified citizens regardless of racer d9€r

sex, political party or geography. rt has already made, and

will continue to make, significant progress in broadening the

base from which these executive appointments are made.

such progress necessarily wilI be of limited impact,

however, if the State Iegislature (with its unusual powers)*

North Carolina
alone can enact

is the only s
legislation.

tate where the legislature



continues to be chosen by a Process which is, after all, the

remnant of an earlier time when the government in North

Carolina was conducted soleIy by white male Democrats. Black

citizens of North Carolina, because of their economic

disadvantage, feel the discriminatory impact of multimember

districting even more than other minorities in the political

process. The Court is thus respectfully urged to strike down

this anachronistic system at least in those districts where the

District Court found ample proof of its discriminatory impact.

Conclus ion

The judgment of the District court should be affirmed.

Respectfully submitted,

Victor S. Friedman
Counsel for Amicus Cur iae