Letter from Dimond to Judge Roth RE: Plaintiffs' Supplemental Responses, Objections and Modifications

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

ron ini EAsTERI{ DrsrRrcr oF NoRTH cARoLTNA
RALEIGH DIVISION

MLPH GINGLES, et aI. ,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

RUFUS EDMISTEN, €t al.,

Defendants.

-and-

AIAIq V. PUGH, €t 41. ,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

JAMES B. HINT, JR., et al.

Defendants.

-and-

JOHN J. CAVANAGH, €t A1.,

Plaintiffs ,

vs.

ALEX K. BROCK, €t al.,

Defendants.

No.8f-803-CIV-5

No. 81-1066-CIV-5

No.82-545-CIV-5

MOTIONFO@

Plaintiffs John J. cavanagh, John tr'I. Fare, John M' Hester'

Richard v. Linville, William I'i. Linville, John Henry l'turray'

J.G.Neal,W.E.Neal,CharlesPierce'FrankE'Rhodes'

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

,)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)



H. Gray swain, Roger P. swisher and w. Grady Swisher, through

counsel, respectfully move the court in accordance with Rule

56, F.R. Civ. P., for entry of sunmary judgment in their
favor in this action.

This motion is based on the pleadings, deposition, affi-
davits and exhibits thereto, which establish that there is
no genuine issue as to any material fact and that movants are

entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law.

This day of November, 1982.

Hamilton C. Horton, Jr.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
450 NCNB Plaza
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27LjL(9r9) 723-L826

OF COUNSEL:

HORTON AND HENDRICK
450 NCNB PLaza
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27L0L
(9r9) 723-L826

Wayne T. EIliott, Esq.
Southeastern Legal Foundation
I800 Century Boulevard, Suite 950
Atlanta, Georgia 30345
(404) 32s-2255

-2



IN THE IINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OT NORTH CAROLINA

RAIEIGH DIVISION

RALPH GINGLES, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

RUFUS EDMISTEN, et al.,

Defendants.

-and-

ALAN V. PUGH, €t Bl.,
Plaintiffs,

vs.

JAIIES B . HUNT , JR. , et a1 .

Defendants.

-and-

JOHN J. CAVANAGH, €t d1.,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

ALEX K. BROCK, €t dl.,

Defendants.

The matter before

Judgment relates only

MEMOMNDIIM SUPPORTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION

FOR SU}E{ARY JUDGMENT T]NDER RI]LE 56

NATURE OF CASE

No. 81-803-CIv-5

No. 81-1066-CIv-5

No. 82-545-CIV-5

the court on this l,lotion for Sununary

to case 82-545-CIV-5. While that .case

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

,)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)



was consolidated by this court with others on July 26, L982,

it was so consolidated without prejudice to plaintiffs' right

to file motions on issues independent of the other cases.

Cavanagh vs. Brock had been filed in the Superior Court

of Wake County on May 4, L982, seeking a declaratory judgment

and injunction restraining the State Board of Elections from

implementing a decennial redistricting of the General Assembly

which would violate those portions of the North Carolina Consti-

tution forbidding the division of counties in the formation of

Senare and House districts (Art. II, S 3(3) and 5(3), N.C.

Constitution). Judge Pou Bailey duly issued a show cause order,

setting a hearing for May L4, but before that hearing could be

held the State Board of Elections Petitioned this court for

Removal, alleging in the petition as their sole ground for

removal that

"ImPlementation of the challenged re-
districting plans by petitioners, defen-
dants in t[e- above-entitled action, is
an act taken bY them under color of
authority derived from a law- providing
for equai rights, sPecificalIY the
Voting Righti Act of 1965...''"'

Plaintiffs' attemPt to remand the cause to the state courts

was denied on July 7, this court concluding that the Board of

Elections was "faced with the direct conflict between comPliance

with the Voting Rights Act and the North Carolina Constitution'.."

It would therefore seem that a basic question before this

court is whether the Voting Rights Act has preempted the North

Carolina Constitution throughout the state, or whether its

authority extends no further than those counties "covered"

-2



under that Act.

FACTS

Although the facts would apply to all 60 of North

Carolina's 100 counties which are not "covered" under S 5 of

the Voting Rights Act (42 USC $ 1973 et seq. (1976)), the

petition relates only to Forsyth County.

Forsyth is not covered under S 5 of the Act, while Guilford

County, inrnediately to its east, is covered under that section.

(Petition for Removal, tf 7).

North Carolina, since before its independence from Great

Britain, has without exception maintained county integrity in

establishing Senate and House districts. (Exhibit A attached) .

In L967, the General Assembly proposed a Constitutional Amend-

ment formally placing into the North Carolina Constitution

what had been the invariable practice of centuries:

"No county
tion of a

"No county
tion of a

shall be divided in the forma-
Senate district",

and

shall be divided in the forma-
Representative district. "

The amendment passed overwhelmingly. (N.C. Manual, 1969, Page

335) and became SS 3(3) and 5(3) of Art. 11 of the N.C. Consti-

tution. (Indeed, the 1-97L legislative session in its decennial

redistricting preserved county lines intact without complaint from

any source).

In 1981, however, the Board of Elections for some reason

-3



decided to submit the amendment (passed more than 10 years

before) to the Attorney General of the United States for

"preclearance" under the provisions of S 5 of the Voting

Rights Act of 1965 (42 USC 1973 c). Since the terms of that

statute are Bo important to this case, Portions ate set out

herein in pertinent Part, with emphasis suPPlied:

"Whenever a state or political subdivision
with resPect to which the prohibitions set
forth in- S L973(b)(a) of this Title" 'are
in effect shal1 enact or seek to administer
any voting qualification or Prerequisite to
voting, oi standard, prqglice or Procedpre
with respect to voting ditt.erent rrom Enac
in ioi""'o, effecr on-Nffi

ean
Act in the United States District Court for
the District of Columbia for a Declaratory
Judgment. . .or such qualification, Prerequisite,
staidard, practice or procedure may be- el-
forced witfiout such prbceeding if. . . submitted

i;;::"Inf; "t'::ril.:$:: :l :lu";!: "tl::'""'within 60 days af ter such submission' ""'
42 USC 1973 (c) .

On Noveraber 30, 1981, the Assistant Attorney General, CiviI

Rights Division, replied to North carolina's preclearance request

(Exhibit B), "We are unable to conclude that this amendment,

prohibiting the division of counties in reapportionments ' does

not have a discriminatory PurPoSe or effect." His letter, care-

fu11y limited to

on behalf of the

to that amendment

the 40 covered counties, concluded "Accordingly,

Attorney General, I must interpose an objection

insof ar as it af fects the covered c!ll!!1€s " 
"'

(emphasis suPPlied).

Thereafter, the specific reapPortionment plans enacted by

the General Assembly and submitted for preclearance, were

-4



rejected by the Attorney General: the Congressional and

State Senate plans on December 7 (Exhibit C) and the State

House Plan on January 2A (Exhibit D).

Significantly, however, each rejection specifically and

carefully limited the Attorney General's objection to the

40 counties covered by S 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

The General Assembly, called into Extra Session to

attempt again to satisfy the Attorney General's requirement as

to the counties covered under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act, met

from February 9 to February 11, L982, and in the process, for

the first time in North Carolina history, divided numerous

counties - both "covered" counties and "non-covered" counties.

Forsyth County, a non-covered county, was one of these

(Exhibit E) .

[The Attorney General on April 19, L982,
rejected tho-se p1ans, too - though he con-
celed they were- "a substantial improvement".
His objections focused on Senate ltistrict
No. 2 ln the northeast and House Districts
L7 and 18 in Cumberland County. These ob-
jections were finally satisliqd by st111
inother Extra Session, concluding April 27,
1982. This last Extra Session is irrele-
vant to this case since it did not under-
take splitting non-covered counties. See
Exhibits F and Gl.

Plaintiffs' argument will demonstrate, first, that Pre-

clearance of our North Carolina Constitutional Amendment was

not, in fact, required; second, that even if preclearance

were required, the Attorney General could suspend under the

supremacy clause the operation of the North Carolina Constitution

-5



only as to the 40 covered counties.

the remaining 60 counties the North

remains the fundamental law of this

redistricting of the State House of

Senate is unconstitutional since it

and 5(3) of our Constitution.

Jct JvL, t v-,

2L5 F. Supp . L69 (D.C. Del. 1963), 377 U.

12 L.Ed. 2d. 620.

Fina11y, since as to

Carolina Constitution

state, the subsisting

Representatives and

violates Art. II S 3 (3)

PRXLIMINARY STATE}MNT OF APPLICABLE LAW

"The rule has been laid dovnr that after ratification by

the people, every reasonable presumption, both of law and fact,

is to be indulged in favor of the validity of an amendment to a

State Constituion." 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Const. Law, $ 53. And while

a state constitutional provision in direct conflict with a federal

statute is invalid under the supremacy clause, in cases of alleged

conflict, "every presumption of law and fact...Iis] indulged in
favor of the legality of such amendment unless the contrary is

made clearly manifest." 16 CJS, Const. Law, $ 99 citing AFL vs.

Wqlson, 60 F. Supp. 1010 (D.C. Fla. L945) , rev. on other grounds,

327 U.S. 582, 66 S. Ct. 761, 90 L.Ed. 873, and Sincock vs. Duffv,,

S 695, 84 S. Cr. L449 ,

Thus, where Oklahoma changed its Constitution regarding

reapportionment, the court there said, "The amendment having

been adopted as an appropriate remedy for existing malappor-

tionment, the people intended for it to prevail as basic 1aw

-6



to the extent that it is in conformity with the supreme 1aw

of the land and that it would fail only insofar as it must

yield to the suPremacy clause of the Federal Constitution...".

Revnolds vs. State Board of Elections , 233 F . SuPp . 323, 328

(W.D. okla. L964). See also Constantion vs. Anson County,

244 N.C. 22L, 93 S.E. 2d.163 (1956); cf. Revnolds vs' Sims,

377 U.S. 533, 584, 84 S. Ct. L362, L2 L.Ed. 2d. 506 (1964).

Summary judgment may be rendered in cases involving

constitutional and other questions of large public import

"...where the record is adequate for the constitutional question

presented and there is no genuine issue of material fact."

6 pt. 2, Moore's Fed. Practice, S 56.17 [10], at 775-776' And,

indeed, surtmary judgment has been granted in actions under the

Voring Rights Acr. NAACP vs. N.Y., 413 U.S. 345,93 S. Ct. 259L,

37 L.Ed. 2d. 648 (1973); Arrovo vs. Tucker. 372 F.S. 764

(E.D. Pa. L974) .

ARGUMENT

I

THE 1968 A]VTENDMENT TO THE NORTH CAROLINA CONSTI-

TUTION DID NOT REQUIRE PRECLEARANCE UNDER S 5 OF

rru uortltc Rtcurs ect, 42 USC S 1973(c).

In 1968, by a vote of 582,633 to 377,395, the people of

North Carolina adopted the following amendments to their Con-

stitution:

-7



"No County shall be divided in the forma-
tion of a Senate district." (Constitution
of North Carolina, Art. II, S 3(3)).

"No County sha1l be divided in the forma-
tion of a-Representative district." (Con-
stitution of North Carolina, Art. II,
s s(3)).

Some 13 years after its Passage it apparently occurred

to the State Board of Elections that it required Federal

approval, and the amendments were submitted to the Attorney

General for "preclearance'r i:nder S 5 of the Voting Rights

Act (42 U.S.C. L973(c)). On November 30, 1981, the Attorney

General objected "insofar as it affects the covered counties",

on the grounds that this amendment might require large multi-

member districts which "necessarily submerge cognizable minority

population concentrations into larger white electoraEes. "

(Exhibit B attached).

On the basis of this letter, the General Assembly was

advised to ignore, and did ignore, the North Carolina consti-

tutional provisions. The record discloses no aEtempt to

obtain a reconsideration nor to appeal to the District Court.

The plaintiffs contend that the 1968 Arqendment did not

require preclearance under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act and that

consequently, the General Assembly could not proPerly ignore

the clear provisions of our Constitution: the Voting Rights

Act is quite clear in stating that Preclearance is required

-8



only for changeq in the previous electoral nracti"""'1' And

this clarity of the Act itself is buttressed by the code of

Federal Procedure amplifying the procedures to be followed

by the Attorney General (28 C 'F 'R' 51' 1 et seq') ' where it

1. Secrion Five of that Act (codified as 42 USC r973(c)
provides, in Pertinent Part,

,'Wltenever a State or political subdivision
with t"tp""t to which the prohibitions set
forth i". ..if'tis title are in ef fect shall
enact ot' t""t-to administer any-voting quali-
fication or Prerequisite to voting-' or

"'''t"iio'' 
in the

united st"t""-ilistrict court for the District
of columii;-i";-; declararory. judgment that
such qrr.lifi"ation, Prerequi!ite' standard'
practice-;;-P;;"edurb does not have the pur-
;;;;-;;a ,iri-not have the effect of denving
or abridei"s-tht right to vote on account of
race or E;13t. ' ' ana"unless and until the
court ""iIiI-;";h 

judgment no per-son sha11

be denied-ihe righi t5 vote for failure to
comPry riti".""f't"q"alification' prerequisite'
s tandardl 

-pra"ticd or Procedure ' 
-' 

' " (Emphas is
suPPlied. )

A proviso permits a proposed change to be submitted to the

AttorneyGeneralratherthantheCourt,andiftheAttor-
neyGeneralinterposesnoobjectionwithin60days'the
changemaybeenforcedwithoutsuchjudicialproceeding.

-9



defines the phrase "change affecting voting" as follows:

"(b). The term 'change affecting
voting', as used herein, shall mean
any voting qualification, prerequi-
site to voting, standard, Practice,
or procedure different from that in
force or effect on the date used to
determine coverage by Section 4(a)...
and shalI include, but not be limited
to, the examples given in Section
5L.4(c)." 28 C.F.R. 51.2(b).

The examples given simply underscore that the preclearance

requirement applied only to "change" or "aIteration. "

" (c) Legislation and administrative ac-
tions constituting changes affecting
voting covered by section 5 include
but aie not limited to, the following
examples:

(1) Any change in qualifications or
eligibility for voting;

(2) Any change in procedures concern-
ing registration, balloting, or inform-
ing or assisting citizens to register
and vote;

(3) Any change in the congtituency of
an offibial oi the boundaries of a
voting unit (e.g., through redistrict-
ing, innexation, or reapPortionment),
the location of a polling place, change
to at-large elections from district
elections or to district elections from
at-large elections;

(4) Any alteration affecting the eligi-
bility bf persons to become or remain
candidates or obtain a Position on the
ballot in primary or genelal elections
or to become or remain officeholders
or affecting the necessity of or methods
for offerin[ issues and propositions for
approval by voting in an election;

-r0



(5) Any change in the eligibility and

d"lriiilarion procedures for independent
candidates;

(6) Any action extending or- shortening
the terin of an official or changing the
method of selecting an of f icial ' (e'g-' 

'
a "fr""g" 

from elecf ion to aPPointment) ;

(7) Any alteration in methods of count-
ing votes.

of course, the point is that the 1968 Amendments to the

North Carolina Constitution did not change or alter our elec-

toral practices one whit. They simply wrote into our Constitu-

tion an invariable practice of our people since long before

this Republic (and the Department of Justice) was conceived

of.

Our earliest written governmental document is probably

the "Concession and Agreements between the Lords Proprietors

and Major william Yeamans and others," of January 7, L665'

Item I0 begins the long unbroken line of territorial integrity

of each governmental subdivision in the election of rePresenta-

tives from the PeoPle:

". . . But as soon as parishes, divisions '
ttiU"", ot districti of the said Counties
.i"-*ta., that then, the inhabitants or
fi""f',ofa6rt of the several and respective
,rii.f't"", tribes, Counties, divisions ' or
Ii;;;r;;; ;i ih"'co,.r.,ties aforesaid do ' bY

our writs, under our seaI, which we engage

"f,.ff 
in due time be issued, annually meet

on the first day of January and choose rree-
f,ofa"tt for """i, 

respective division' tribe
oi-p"ti"f, to be the deputi-es or representa-
tives of the ".*". 

. .which body" 'sha1l" 'be
the General Assembly of the Colony." North^
Carolina Government, 1585-L874, Secretary of
ffilina (1975), P.r14.

- 11 -



The "Fundamental Constitution" of July 2L,

65 continued the precedent of establishing

on "precincts" (counties) . North Carolina

L669, in pa

a "parliame

Government,

p. L27.

Thereafter, from L670 through L722, while the Governor's

Council was appointed by the Governor, the General Assembly

was based on county lines, and though some counties had multi-

seat districts, no county had less than one rePresentative, and

no county lines were split. This pattern continued even into

the turmoil of Provincial Government (1774-L776) when a Congress

from the province was based on counties. (North Carolina

Government, supra, p. 151).

After independence was declared, the tradition continued:

between L776 and f835 each County elected one Senator and two

members of the House of Commons, with the 7 Borough towns

(Salisbury, Hillsboro, Halifax, Fayetteville, Edenton, New

Bern and Wilmington) electing one member each.

Then after the adoption of the Constitution in 1835, while

the Borough tolrns were abolished, each County continued to have

at least one rePresentative, although Senators began in some

cases to represent more than one County. In no case, however,

were county lines crossed. Again, after the Constitution of

1868 and until today, the tradition was continued: although

each County had at least one rePresentative and although some

Senate districts comprised more than one county, counties were

ragraph

nt" based

supra,

-L2



.2not clrvloeo.

seq.

This tradition had continued r:nbroken for 3L7 years in

I.lorth Carolina until the Extra Session of the General Assembly

of Lg82 - which for the first time attempted to divide coun-

ties in the creation of Representative and Senate districts '

It can hardly be said, then, that the Amendments of 1968,

making a 317 year unbroken tradition a part of our Constitution,

were an "alteration" Or "change" in Our eleCtoral practices

which required preclearance under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act ' 3'

Beer vs. United States, 425 U.S. 130, 138, 96 S' Ct' L357,

47 L.Ed. 2d. 629,638 (1976) addressed the issue: There, New Orleans

had in ]-g54 adopted a charter provision establishing two at-large

seats on the City Council. The Lower Court held these at-large

seats diluted the black vote. The Supreme Court vacated the

District Court decision holding in part,

North Caroli4e !q\/ernnen!, supra ' p. 200 , et

"the language of S 5 clearly provides
that it appties only to-proposed changes
in voting- procedures.'Discriminatory
practicel. . . it ttituted prior to November,
L964. . . are not subj ect to the requirement

2.

3.

Exhibit A, the memorandum furnished counsel for the state
bv the Director of North carolina's Institute of Government,
.ia-"rp"-ia11y pages 4, 5 and 6, is instructive on this
point.

The fact that no one intended the amendment to make any

"fri"g- 
whatever is underscored by the language used in putting

the imendment before the people in the general election of
November 5, 1968: "Amending certain sections of the Consti-
tution continuing the Present system of re in the
G;neral ate,
Raleigh, p. 335 (emphasis supplied).

-13



of preclearance [under S 5]'...the
at-large seats having existed without
change since 1954, were not subject to
review in this proceeding under S 5."

I1

EVEN IF THE 1968 CONSTITUTIONAL AI"IENDMENTS DID

REQUIRE

ACT, THE

SUBMISSION UNDER S 5 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS

RULINGS OBTAINED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE APPLY ONLY TO THE 40 COVERED COUTTTIES

AND NOT TO THE RE}IAINING 60 COUNIIES OF NORTH

CAROLINA.

Section Five of the Voting Rights Act, by its olvn terms,

applies only to "any State or...political subdivision of a State

which (1) the Attorney General determines maintained on November 1

Lg64, a1y test or device, and with respect to rvhich (2) the Direc-

tor of the Census determines that less than 50 Per centum of the

persons of voting age residing therein were registered on Novem-

ber 1, L964...". 42 USCA S 1973(b). (The Statute goes on to up-

date these requirements to l{ovember I, L972, but the same restric-

tions apply).

AII parties concede that Forsyth County is not a "covered"

potitical subdivision: indeed, only 40 of our 100 counties are

covered under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act. This concept of inclu-

sion of some and exclusion of other political subdivision within a

State was approved in South Carolina vs. Katzenbach, 383 U'S' 301'

-L4



86 S. Ct. 803, 15 L.Ed. 2d. 769 (1966), and applied in

Clavton vs. N.C. Board of Elections , 3L7 F. Supp. 915 (EDNC

1970), where the question before a three Judge Court was a

change in North Caroli.na's election laws which pertained to

only 6 of the 100 counties. 0f these 6, 4 were under the Voting

Rights Act. (The change related to a provision enacted as

Chapter 1039 of the Session Laws of L969 which prohibited

electioneering within 500' of a polling place). Acknowledging

that the Voting Rights Act applied only to the 4 covered coun-

ties, the court bifurcated its decision, holding with resPect

to the covered counties that the statute was void because not

precleared under S 5. As to the non-covered counties, the

Voting Rights Act was not applied: as to them the court, while

conceding that "unequal treatment constitutes a denial of equal

protection only if the classification lacks a reasonable basis. . . ",

held that the equal protection clause was violated because no

reason for the different treatment of the 6 counties from the

remaining 94 could be adduced.

Obviously, the writ of the Section Five does not run

into uncovered counties - a fact apparently conceded by the U.S.

Attorney General: the letters from the Attorney General's office

relating to the very issue at bar are very careful to limit their

attempted jurisdiction only to the "covered" counties. Thus,

the letter of November 30, 1981 (Exhibit B) saysr

-15



"This determination w@ urisdictions

covered by S 5-..." and interposes an objection "insofar as

it affects the covered Counties ' "

Again, the letter of December 7, 1981 (Exhibit c), directs

its attention to the covered counties alone and objects "to the

senate plan under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of L965 as

it relates to the covered counties." The same phrasing is em-

ployed in rhe letter of January 20, Lg82 (Exhibit D) ' Finally '

the letter of April 19 , Lg82 (Exhibit F) concluded " ' ' ' the effect

of the objection by the Attorney General is to make the redis-

tricting plans for the Senate and State House of Representatives

tegally unenforceable in the covered counties ' "

Our contention that, even if the 1968 amendments needed pre-

clearance under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Forsyth County \tas

excluded from that requirement, is further buttressed by the trans-

cript of the Senate Committee on Legislative Redistricting on

January 28, 1982, 4t Page 5 where Jerris Leonard, attorney for

North Carolina relates:

"The direct question was asked of Mr '

-ro"l"l-rho-i"' Chief of the Voting Rights
s."tio", tt" the 60 counties covered?
th; 

-;;Piiedl 
.."vle11 ' of course lh"y- are

.roi "oi'"i"4 ' " [Mr' Leonard : ] "WelI '
tr',e"1-vo;-;;"' t'-trave any jurisdiction' "

tM;. 
'-rl,".t 

' i--"wer1, that is correct ' "

(Mr.LeonardhTentontoquoteMr.JonesaSsayingiftheplan

were ,'egregious" in its treatment of minorities, section 5 might

apply - a caveat inapplicable to this proceeding) '

-16



It seems inescapable, therefore, that the State Senate

and House redistricting plans as thev relate to Forsvth

Countv are not protected from attack by virtue of a Voting

Rights Act argr:ment. Manifestly, they are patently in

violation of the Constitution of North Carolina - which, as

\^7e shal1 see, remains the law of the land, though its effect

in 40 counties may be temporarily suspended.

III

SECTION FIVE OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT DOES NOT VOID

BUT I'TERELY SUSPENDS NORTH CAROLINA'S OIJN LAI,JS UNTIL

IT, EX VI TERMINI, CEASES.

Should the court conclude that the North Carolina Consti-

tutional Amendment did constitute such a change as required

preclearance under S 5, then it would logically follow that the

supremacy clause of the United States Constitution (Art. VI(2))

permits the Voting Rights Act to suspend the oPeration of those

provisions of the North Carolina Constitution which are at issue

in this case - as to the 40 covered counties. As to the remain-

ing 60 counties, however, the l{orth Carolina Constitution remains

in full force and effect, since S 5 of the Voting Rights Act does

not there apply, and hence the Supremacy Clause has no predicate

to oPerate uPon.

The nub of the case, plaintiffs resPectfully suggest,

lies here: if the U.S. Attorney General's objection to the

-L7



North Carolina Constitutional prohibitions against dividing

counties in legislative districting rendered them "ineffective

as laws and unenforceable", as contended by defendants (Answer,

Seventh Defense) why, then, the defendants must prevail.

If, however, the N. C. Constitution's operation is simply

suspended in the 40 covered counties until the Voting Rights

Act's sanctions are lifted, then our constitution is the law

of the land in the remaining 60 counties, and the plaintiffs

must prevail.

It would appear that this aspect of the case has been

answered - favorably to the plaintiffs - by the Supreme Court,

by accepted and established 1egal definitions, by the legislative

committee history, and by the debates in Congress surrounding the

bilI's initial passage.

In its seminal opinion in South Carolina vs. Katzenbach

(383 U.S. 301, 86 S. Cr. 803, 15 L.Ed. 2d.769(1966)), the

Supreme Court described the effect of S 5 ' "Section 5 Pre-

scribes a second remedy, the suspension of al1 new voting

regulations pending review by federal authorities to determine

whether their use would perpetuate voting discrimination'"

Id. at 315 - 316. Further, the court stated, "the Act automa-

tically suspends the operation of voting regulations enacted

after November 1, L964, and furnishes mechanisms for enforcing

the suspension. A state or political subdivision wishing to

make use of a recent amendment to its voting laws therefore

has a concrete and immediate 'controversy' with the Federal

Government...An appropriate remedy is a judicial determination

-18



that continued suspension of the new rule is unnecessary

vindicate rights guaranteed by the 15th Amendment'" Id' 335.

Moreover, not once in the legislative history of the

Act as reported is there a suggestion that $ 5 works a

nullification or vacation of a state enactment: the re-

ference is always that the enactment is "suspended"' U'S'

Code Congressional and Administrative News 1965 passim;

see especially pages 2455, 2458, 2552, 2559, 2562 and 2579.

And what is the legally accepted definition of "suspension"?

"The word 'suspension' is ordinarily
defined as meaning a temporary stoP; a

temPorary stop of a right; a :emporary
deliv; interruption or cessation; the
ceasing or causing something. to cease
from oieration teiporarily; intermission;
stav. ^It infers an expectation or PurPose
of iesumPtion." 83 CJS 926'

This was assuredly the definition intended by the congress:

it was its intent that tests and devices such as literacy tests

which it felt had been unfairly administered in the Past should

be temporarily lifted in the states and political subdivisions

under the Act until it could be shown that their resumPtion would

not work renewed discrimination. Meanwhile, of course, in non-

covered states and political subdivisions literacy tests and other

state election laws would continue as before' Section 5's Pur-

pose was intended to "fteeze" election laws within the covered

jurisdictions by forbidding enforcement of new election laws

within those jurisdictions until aoproved either by a 3 Judge

district court in the District of Columbia or by the Attorney

to

at

-19



General.Thus,senatorTydingsexplainedthisprovision
of rhe bill:

"Freezinp of State Voter Qualifications

and Procedures

Section5dealswithattemPtsby.States
;i (;i") political subdivisions whose

tests or devises (sic) had bee{r -suspended
unders_+-toaltervotingqualifications
.r,a pto"edures which were in effect in
uo""fiu"i-i, Lg64' Section 5 permits a

stat; ;; pofiii""l subdivision to enforce
,", i"q,-,iiements only- if 

^ 
i9 submits the

,,., i"{,rirements to the Attorney General

""a irrJ-eitorr,"y General does not inter-
Pose objections within 60 days thereafter'

If the new qualifications are not submitted
to tii" eiioi''ty General ' or if they are sub-
*ittea and he interposes an objection'. then
tf," 

'II"r"-oi subdivision will not be able
to enforce the new requirements without ob-
tri.,iig-r-:"aicial deierminarion that such

""r'i"Eriri"itiot't 
or procedures do not

have the purpose 'or' isif :' not have the
effe"i--of'deirying or abridging rights
g".ili.""a-uy' tr''E 15th Amendment ' "
C""s:"R;;.,'Senate, April 23' 1965' P' 8368'

That it was contemPlated that uPon the suspension being lifted

thecoveredjurisdictionswouldsimplyresumetheStatusquo
ante, is clearly shornrrr in that same debate at page 8367 '

Finally,andattheriskofunderscoringtheobvious,the
intentionofCongressthattheStates'lawswithincovered
jurisdicEions not be rendered void but merely suspended tempor-

arily,is}imnedinthiscolloquybetweenSenatorMansfield,

-20



the Majority leader, and senator cotton, of New Hampshire.

"Mr. Cotton...But the original bill provides
ti* tes rrrhere it ia found or indicated
that literacy tests are being used to Pre-
;;;a registrition and voting.by-Negroes, the
literac! tests in those parEicirlar areas .would be
,Uoii"ti,a. The Senator irom New Hampslire could
vote for the ,rrp"."ion of such testi for a-period
of time or could'vote for the substitution for a

;;ri;a; of a certain grad-e attained in school'
'frt the Senator from [trew Hampshire is extremely
reluctant to "ot" 

for a bill'which would Permanently
.boli"h . literacy test anyohere in the nation.
I think it would Le a sad bay if Congress turned
its face against literacy tests in those states
which choose to have ttrem, because the future of
ih; Republic depends largely on the literacy and
the intelligence of its electorate '

I hope that this point will be made clear'
If ttre peiioa is not mide temPorary, 3']d if the
[iff i"'to be voted upon, I still would be
compelled to vote for'the bill' But I am sin-

""rL1y "or,""r.,"a-tn"t 
the bill sha1l contain such

"-ptoritio.rsothatitcannotbesaidthatbe-
"ri-r." the administration of literacy tests has
been used in a discriminatory manner, -or is
affegea to have been so used in certain states 

'
Co"gi".s has undertaken to abolish a literacy
test anY-where.

Mr. Mansfield. The senator from New Hampshire is'affi key word is 'suspension', not 'Per-
manency.'

Mr. Cotton. It is 'susPension'?

Mr. Mansfield. Yes

Mr. Cotton. I am greatly reassured' I thank the-affi"g.ri"t-,ed 
maj oiity leader. "

Cong. Rec. Senate, April 30, 1965, p' 9076'

-2t



CONCLUSION

To recapitulate, plaintiffs contend that the North caro-

lina prohibition against dividing counties in the for:uration

House and Senate districts simply does not constitute a change

in this State's practice and procedure so as to require pre-

clearance.

Accordingly, plaintiffs are entitled to surmary judgment

that the historic practice of nondivision of county lines is not

covered under S 5 of the Voting Rights Act '

Should the court determine, however, that the Constitutional

provision is subject to the S 5 Preclearance requirements ' the

plaintiffs are entitled to surmary judgment that the ambit of s 5

does not extend to n6n-covered counties and that, as a result' the

North carolina constitutional provision is controlling as to them'

This day of December, L982.

RespectfullY submitted,

eiioit"v for Plaintiffs in 82-545-CIV-5
450 NCNB Plaza
Winston-Sa1em, N. C. 27L)L
(9r9) 723-L826

OF COUNSEL:

HORTON AND HENDRICK
450 NCNB PLaza
Winston-Salem, I{. C. 27L01
(919) 723-L826

Wayne T. Elliott, Esq
SOI]THEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION
1800 Century Boulevard, Suite 950
Atlanta, Georgia 30345
(40+1 32s-2255

-22



xEI'0RA!'lDt!{

TO:

FRO}T:

DATE:

SIEJECT:

EXHIBIT A

Jaoes Uallace 7
a_

John Sandere ))L+/
september 2d1lg8l

The Subdlvtslon of Countles ln glswtng

Dlstrlcts for the Electlon of lbmbers

North Carollna

Senate and RePretentatlve

of the General Asseob1Y of

The purpose of thls roemorandun ls to trace the evolutton of the

provlslonsoftheConstltutlonofNorthCarollnawtthrespecttothe

establlstmentofdlstrlctsfortheelecttonofthenembersoftheSenateand

HouseofRepresentatlvesr,lthParElculartotheaEtenttonofthequesElonof

whether and when a couoty nay be dtvlded ln the forroatlon of such a distrlct'

1979-I93s

FromlgT6throughlE35,theConstltutlonofNorthCarollnaprovldedthat

the senate should conslst of one member elected from each county and the House

of commons should conslst of two oenbers elected fron each county plus rnembers

elected one from each of slx (later seven) boroughs' The county was the

electlondlstrictforuenbersofthesenateandwlthonlyoneSenaEor

aPPortlonedtoeachcounty'noquesttonofthesubdlvtstonofcountlestn

forntng senate dlstrlct6 arose. con6tltutlon of 1776' Sec' 2' The county uas

also the dlstrlct for the electton of oeobers of the House of commons (except

for the borough oembers) and the conetltutlon dld not authorlze the dlvlston

ofcountlestnforrnlngsuch.dlstrlcts.ConstltutlonoflTT6,sec.3.

EXHIBIT A



2

1836- I 868

rtre state constltutlon uas extenslvely anended ln 1835. ftre senate uas

then uade repre8entatlve of property (rneasured lndlrectly by atate taxea) wlth

senators'to be elected by dlstrlcts' decenntally establlshed by the General

Aaeeobly - ln proportton to the publlc taxes pald lnto the Treasury of the

State. . ., Provlded, That no county shall be dtvlded ln the for^rnatlon of a

Senatortal dlstrlct." hendments of 1835, ArE. Ir Sec. l, Par. l. Under the

1835 aoendments, the House of Comrnons was oade nalnly representatlve of the

countles as unlts, wlth some leavenlng for populatlon. The House of c'omsrons

uas corDposed of 120 rnembeES,'blennlally chosen by ballot, to be elected by

the countles o . . ." Every county uas guaranteed the rtght to elect one

member, lrrespectlve of lts populatlonr and the members remalnlng after the

fulflllnent of that guarantee nere apportioned arDong the nore populous

countles accordlng to a foruula prescrlbed by the constttutlon' Anendoents of

1835, Art. I, Sec. l, Par. 2. Thls provlslon was unlfornly treated as

requtrlng slngle-county dtstrtcts for counons roeobers, and no Power wa8

granted to the General Assenbly to dlvlde or coublne countles ln forulng

electton dlstrlcts. slnce blacks uere not pernltted to vote under the

Arnendments of 1835, the prohlbttlon agalnst dlvldlng countles ln forulng

dlstrlcts could have had no raclal purpose or effect'

I 868- t 968

baslc concePtlon of the

fron distrlcts and that

elected f tot g1!gg.

Ttre Constltutlon adopted ln t868 retatned the

Aoendments of 1835 that Senators ehould be elected

roembers of the House of Repreeentattves should be

EXHIBIT A



o
l

The constltutlon of 1868' ltrt' rI ' thc' 5' Prescrlbed that the senate

dlstrlcts ahould be eetablished on the basls of populatlon eo that cach ehould

contaln -as nearly 8s l0ay be, an equal ntnber of lnhabltants' excludtng allens

and Indtan8 not taxed . . . ; and no county shall be dlvtded ln the foroatlon

of a Senate Dlstrlct, unless such county shall be equitably entltled to tt'o or

nore Senators.' thls provlston comtemplated that only tn the event that a

s1ngle county contalned sufflclent lnhabltantE to cause 1t to be allocated two

or Dore Senators would that county be subJect to dlvtslon lnto tt'o or Dore

electton distrlcts. In fact, the General Assembly never saw flt to allocate

Dore than one Senator to any slngle-county dlstrlct untll the apportlonnent

act of 1963. At that tlme, three Senate seats were aPPortloned to the

dlstrlct composed of lbcklenburg County and two senate 6eats were aPPortloned

to the dlstrlcE composed of ForsyEh county. No effort uas oade then or at any

subsequent ttDe to dlvtde those countles lnto tl'o or three electlon dlstrlcfE

as the Constltutlon would have allowed'

The House of Representatlves under the constltutlon of 1868' Art' II'

Secs. 6 and 7, contlnued to be apportloned tn the a€rme manner as had been the

House of Commons under the Constttutlonal Anendroents of 1835' save for the

fact thar the whole populatlon and not the federal populatlon L'as used ln

calculating the apportlorunent of 6eatt left over after the guarantee of one

seat Per county had been 6atl6fled. The Constltutlon, lrt. II, Sec. 6,

provlded "thal the House of Representattves shall be conpoeed of one hundred

andtwentyRepresentatlves,blennlallychosenbyballot,tobeelectedbythe

countles resPectlvelY . . . .' Ihe county uas the electton dlstrlct' There

combtnatlon of counttes or the dlvlelon lnto two or
was no provlslon for the

EXHIBIT A



4

Dore electloo dlstrlcEt of countte6 tlr;ri 'ere ePportloned tuo or loore Eembers

of the House of Representatlvee. In the absence of a con6tttutlonal provlelon

for the dlvlslon of countles, lt was understood that euch authorlty d1d not

cxlet.

The syrnpathy of the conventlon of 1868, whlch fraoed the constttutlon of

1868, for voLlng by blacks was lndtsputable;lt opened the franchtse to all

black oales 2l years of age. ltrerefore lt ls lnprobable thst the nerobers of

that convention understood the llmttatlons they lnposed on dlvldlng countles

ln the formatlon of leglslattve dtstrlcts to have had the purpose or effecl of

dlsadvantaglng black voters'

Drum v. Seawell

As a result of an actlon (Drum v. seawell) brought ln the unlred Dl6tr1ct

Court for the Mlddte Dlstrlct of North Carollna ln 1965, a three-Judge court

declared Ehe exlsting apportlonnent of the North carollna Senate and House of

RepresenEaEtve6 to be ln vlolatlon of the unlted states constttutlon and

ordered both houses to be reapporEtoned on the basls of populaElon' The court

found no fault wlth the exlstlng 6tate constltutlonal provlslon governlng the

aPPortlonsentofthestateSenate,slnceltrequlredequalltyofpopulatton

among dlstrlcts. r! found that the exrstlng provlslon governtng aPPortloru0ent

of the House of Representatl.ves was lnvalld because there L?as no way ln whlch

everycountycouldbegrraranteedoneofthel20oembersoftheHouseandthe

remalnlng tuenEy nerobers st1lI be so apporttoned that equal representatlon ln

proportlon to populatlon could achleved. Accordlngly' the courE held'that

theprovlelonsoftheStateConstltutlonrequlrtngthateachcountybe

afforded at lea6t one Representatlve regardless of lts populatlon and the

EXHIBIT A



5

loplementlng etatute (N.C.G.S. 120-2) t-" be ln vtolatlon of the Equal

Protectlon provlslons of the Fourt€entlr Anendment and therefore nul1 and

YOtd.-

purEuant to the nandate of the federal court, the General Assenbly net tn

January of 1966 and reapportloned the state senate and House of

RepresentaLlves. Ttre. plans 1t then adopted were subsequently approved by the

three-judge federal court and controlled the electlons of 1966' I968' and

1970. Ttrose plans dld nor dlvtde countles tn the formatlon of Senate or

RepresentaElve dtstrlcts. No Protest was nade of that fact aE the ttme' nor

dld the court take excePtlon to that fact on lts own account'

Constitutional Amendment of 1968

The Legtslattve Research commlsslon flled wlth the General Assenbly of

L967 a report dealing wlth several aspects of the organlzatlon and servlces of

the General Assembly of North carollna. one recommendatlon of that rePort

read as follows:

lrlerecommendtheaoendmentoftheStateConstttutlonlnordertoconforu
the provlstons of that Consittutlon pertalnlng to the aPPortlonnent of

the State i"gi.f"t"re to t'he current Practlces ln that reEPect

That brief secEton of the report of the Leglslatlve Research comnlsslon

noted that tlre actlon of the 1966 extra sessl0n of the General Asserobly ln

compltance wlth the order of the court ln Drun v' seawell, "made obselete a

portlon of the provlslons of the North carollna constttutlon wlth resPect to

the apportlonment of the House. l'Jhlle the constltutlonal provlslons governlng

apportloru0enE of the senate are not tn confllct wlth the Federal conetltutlon'

they are ln need of nlnor clarlfylng revlslon." A bltl to cerry out the

EXHIBIT A



6

recoBmendatlon of the Leglslattve Rese.rr, l'r comolsslon was eubnlttcd to the

General Assenbly of 1967, approved by the regutslte three-fifthe of ell the

oeobers of each house, rattfled by the voterg of the State tn Novenber of

1968, and took effect uPon the certlflcatlon of the anendnent late tn 1968'

The adoptlon of thls aoendnent made no change ln the actual ePPortlonnent of

ueobers of the Senate and House of Representatlves or ln dlstrtcts from whlch

oembers rrrere then elected. Ihe provlslons ulth respecE to the establlstment

of senate dtstrlcts and Ehe apportlonrnent of senators amonS those dlstrlcts

were rewrlcten ln the lnterest of clarlty. Ttre only posslbly new provlslon

b'as the declaratlon that 'llo county shall be dlvlded ln the foruatlon of a

Senate Dlstrlct . . . .'! Constitutlon of 1868 as anended ln 1868, Art' II'

Sec.4(3).TttisprovlslonaPPears!oreverselnpartthatprovlslonofthe

Constirutlon as ir had read from 1868 to I968 pernlttlng the dlvlslon of a

county to which more than two Senators were aPPortloned tnto two or more

electoral distrlcts. That authority had never been exerclsed by the General

Assembly, however, and therefore the lncluslon ln the 1958 aoendoent of the

absolute prohibltlon agalnst the divlslon of countles tn the forroatlon of

Senale distrlct6 constituted 1n the mlnds of the General Assembly and the

volers of the state no change ln pracEtce. Nor dld lt have any raclal notlve

or effect. There havlng no been no precedent exPerience of the use of less

than county-wlde electlon distrtcEs for rnembers of the Senate, there ts no

basls for speculatlon Ehat under such a divlslon of countles' black voters or

8ny ot,her partlcular segroenE of the populatlon would have enJoyed advantaSes

that they dld not enJoy under the prevalllng Practlce of electtng senators

from dlstrlcts that were at least county+rlde ln extent'

EXHIBIT A



7

Thelg63anendnentalsouadeclear;lrathadbeenunlforulyunderetoodto

be the case froo 1776 fopard:

- No county ehall be dtvtded tn the for-natlon of a Representatlve Dletrtct '

. . .- constltutlon of 1858 as anended tn 1968' Atrt' II', sec' 5(3) ' Agaln'

thts constttuted no change tn the exlsttng pettern of apportlonnent; tndeed'

lt has been unlforroly understood thal the constlcutlonal provlslon as lt read

prlortolg68alsoprohlbltedthesubdivlsloncountleelnthefortratlonof

Representativedlstrlct6revenlhoughacountyotghtbeapportlonedtl',oor

EoreseatslntheHouseofRePresentatlves.lhelg63aoendnentdld

ackno,,rledge that fact that - [T]he Representatives shall be elected f roo

dlstrlcts . . 
"' 

, a recognltlon of the fact that oany oulti-county dlstrlcts

forelectingroembersoftheHouseofRePresentatlveshadexlstedslnce1966.

Agaln, stnce no county had ever been dlvtded ln the formatlon of

RepresentaElvedlstrlcEE,therelsnobaslsforspeculatlonthaEundersucha

sub-countydlstrlcttng,blackvoter6oranyot,herldenttftablesegoentofthe

votlngpopulatlonwouldhaveenjoyedgreateradvantagethantheyenJoyedunder

theprevalllngplanofdlstrlctscomposedofoneormoreuholecountles.

Theclearcoomandofthelg6Saurendnentthatcountlesshouldneverbe

dlvtdedlntheforuatlonofSenateorRepresentatlvedlstrtct6'1lkethe

unlfompracEtcestnce|TT6,reflectedtheconvlctlonofleglslatorsand

voters thaE iE tlould be unwise publlc poltcy for countles to be subdlvlded

lntopotentiallycomPetltlvepolltlcalunlts,asrrouldllkelyfollowthe

creatlonofleglslatlvedlstrlctsoflessthancounty+lldeexten!.The

countleehavenanyS,overrrtrentalandpolttlcalintere6E6thatextendthroughout

thecounty;theselnterests.ofEenbearuponlocalorttateirldeleglslatlon;

andthebesttnterestsofthecountlescouldbeoostfalthfullyrePresentedtn

the Generar Assenbly if the counrles uere not pollttcally eubdlvlded' Ttrat ls

EXHIBIT A



the poIlttcal Judgoent

hes nothlng to do nlth

8

lhat the prohlblt-i,)n under exanlnatlon besPeaks, and lt

raclal conslderatlong.

Constltutlon of 1971

Ttre North Carollna State Constltutlon Study Commtsslon drafted a revised

constitutton that nas subEltted to the General Assenbly of 1969, approved by

that sesslon, eubnltted to the voterg ln 1970, approved by theo at that

elecEton, and took effect on I JuIy 1971. That provlston nade only very nlnor

changes ln the provlslons of Arttcle II of the constttutlon deallng wlth the

apportloruDenE of the Senate and House of Representatives' A comparlson of the

conslltutton as lt read followlng the aoendoent of 1968 and ln the

corresponding provlslons of the constltutlon of l97l reveals that the changes

are a! trosE 8,r;umatlcal. Ttre Comnlsslon staEed that 'the provlstons governlng

aPPortlonnenE of the two houses, adopted by tlre people ln Novenber, 1958, have

been brought fon^rard ln the proposed texE wlth no substantlve change'- RePort

of the North Carollna State Constltutlon Study Commlsslon' p' 30 (I958)' Tttts

nas notably true wlth respect to the parallel provlslons for the Senate and

House of Representatlves st8Eln8, that -}.lo county shall be dlvlded tn the

fornatlon of a senate [or Representallve] Dtstrlct ' ' '- thus the

constlEutlon of lgTl relterated the pollcy that had been earller declared by

the voters ln 1968. there ls no basls for allegtng that the General Assenbly

or the voters ln 1969-70 had a raclal oottve ln reassertlng the lmmenorlal

poltcy agalnst dlvldlng counttes tn foruing leglslatlve dlstrlcts'

It ls the provlslons of the conetltutlon of l97l under uhlch the General

Assembly of 1981 acted ln d.evlslng the dlstrlcte and apportloNoent of membere

of the senate and House of Representatlves aoong them, effectlve for the

electtons of 1982 and eubsequenE years'

EXHIBIT A



Clivil ltrtlltt: I )tvtsltrtl

;;,'oiiil:i,i E,XHIBItr N

O!ficc ol thc Astislont Attorttc.r' Gcnetol
l9'otlt i,t t t ott, D. C. 2 0 5 30

J 0 nlOv t93t

Mr. AIex Brocl<'d*u""ti"" SecrctarY - Dircctol:
Sltra-" Iloard of Ult:ctiorrs.
s;;;; aor, Ra)-eigh Brrilrlit't1i
5 \'lest tlargctt StrecL
R."I;iin, NErth Carolina 2160L

Dear !1r. Brock:

Thisisinrefercttcet.othclg6EamcndnrenE(H.R.No,47L
(I967) ) , "f',itit i'oi'itrt' ri'ar: nn ":::ci' 

't't''ntt be divicled in tire

forrnation o,,, 
,d;;;;"-"1 Rc,::cscrltaLi'e ciistrict aud trirj'ch r:as

recenrl-y s,runi..o,r .o ct.,"'ii;;;;;y ceneral- Dur:sualrt to section 5

crf rhe vorilig Righrs ncr-.oi 1.965, nS amoi]ae'a, 42 U' s ' c' 1973c'

Your strbmisrion il"' conrpf "ruJ'nn 
October I ' I9BI '

\.Iel.ravetnadeacarefulrcl,j.crloft.lrcinfo::mationtjrat-you
have 1:rovided, the_ eveiltr-rriror.cling it'," enaclmelt of the c5ange'

tl.re applicarlo* of t5e r".,",-tJr.,".,r in ]iasr legislaCive reapportron-

l.ncnLs, and "l*riorrts 
and infortnat-iorr p'o'ia"i-i'y other inEcresced

parries. o"-;il';";nri, of ;;;;-"rlu:yrls, .wg are.unabre to concLr':ce

'that this amenctnent, prohr;i;i"; ;if'9 division of courlties in

reappor:Eior',,nonii, cloes ,',oi'-il"'"-" cliscrimillator-y PurPose or ef f ecc '

Ourarralysissltowst'.lrat.tlreprolrillitionagainstdividing
t.he 40 cover:ccl tountics i,'t'r-r-,o iot'ni'tiot' of Senate and tlouse

cistriccs prec]ictably '"q"i,",,-n,.,d.ha'--rua 
Eo tlre uSe of , ia::ge

*uILi-rner.'er clj.sr-::icr:;. '5;;-".,r"i1;ir-r'!r.,ot''i f'-trEt:er t''ac t'.c trse

of such nulti-nrcnrber clisEricts lrecc't''iily subrnerg'es cog;rizable

mirioriry l,onr.rlarion .o.,.o,.,;;;;i;;; int-o Iirger t:hi te elcc:01'aLcs '

In tire co'rt-ext of the '"ti^i- P'."t "::.'"8 
trriu se:1)s to cxis r ' such

a pirerrcrrnc.on opcrates .'il]i-,onu: 
rl cotr ri '''t'E 

to opel:al-c "to ,ini'rize

or cancel. out that. rotir-.,i rtro,rgrl'r of r-acial 
' 

olement s of rhe

voti ng, populatioit' " LqiGl]'i""''io'-&i"5;;-u' s' a3:' 439 (1955)'

EXHIBI-I s



1'lrj.sdctol:tninart'i'orrvri't'lr):ci;P"(:1-Lotl:cjt:risc'licLj'ons;
covererl i:y su.ii.n 5 oI: Lh; v"t inrl )il r-,irts Act '';hot:l'cl j'. r)o

way bc rcaarala-i,., Prcc lu,1i.r,r1 g1111 .!!;r t.t) f rorrt fc;). ) ovri nr.] a

policy of ptuturvi'ni couul-y Ij ncs r'Irctrc'vcr fc;rs;il-rlc in

forntulaLing '';;-not''rlist'i'"to 
' Inrlccrl ' this is :ll:-po)'icy 

j n

many states, =rr 
jc,.ct 

-or,rry. 
t,,., t-)rc P):ecl.carattrce r'-equirclnel'1ts of

Section 5, r^irere aPPIj'calll'c ' Itt Lf'c ilrcs;t:nr- st:brnj'ssion'

however, vre .;;-uuoir:ati'nc; a legirl retlrtj-rentcttt' t-'!rat evary

co,llty must r:e-inc I rrrlecl j.;) t'5c ptnt't ils an t:n6ivi<lecl vrho 1. '

As noLc(l atbovc, t-he incscal.>a'hl'c ef f cet ()f st:cll a r:cquil:ctrrent

is t.o su.i:mergc sj.zeal>l.e bl.;:,;,''..,*u,"uit.i.t:i; i')a::9c t.urL'i-

rnctttl.rc:: di s Lr ic t' s '

Underthesecircuntstatrces,atlc.ic-;r'tirlcltl^]lY..l.standarc.Is
establishedi.,-."roos,.rc),'astllc'i-'::v.r.'riiteasL'r{:cs-'423U's'
130 ( I97(,) , *u ir. una,le r:; ;;".1urlc-l-iiic--trlc -tg6g atrte,r'ln:cni

rrxlrriring 'o^iirlrio., 
of ,ri,l.,,rti-.= irr'Jtilsral'-irrc rcclistricti.j

c]ocsllOthave-er::acj.al].yt.ljscri:njtla,'Or),pt]rI)o5e9'effr:ci..
Accordingfy, o'' tchalf r:f t"lrc Attol:t'tc:r' CetleraJ ' I must

interposcallohjccl..iotrtol.rrirLatttc:lt,l1i\C'lltirtsol.i'::i]s]itaffe.cts
the covcred Cor.'ltlt-l'cS

Of cotlrsc ' a:'i PI'o\/i tlr'rti I>)' Scct'i orr 5 of t'lre Votillq

Riqhts Act, i,;;-!ave ln:.. ,..jqi.,t. 1., scck a r]ec ].aratory 1r-ttirrnetrt

from tl'tt: t.lrrr'tetl States I)istrici- Court for the: Distri'cL of

CoIr-rrrrbj ir that th'is c)ratrrl''' has nc j'Llrcr t-llc PLIl:posc nor wil'I

have +*'t1r.: ef fcct of clenf intt'tt 'ib::icllli'111 
titc right to vo1-c on

account-- c:f race ' color ot""tl'nlt"ttr-rlf.> j ir a lallqLl;tge tlinor j'ty

orotlD. .trr aclrlit ioll ' 
t-trc) r'itfi''at'rt't' f':'r tho Alir'i nj'strirt'iort of

6u"tion 5 (Sect-ion 5t'44' 4(' Ircd' )l'eg' 878) 1>ertriit )'crr 1-o

reqr.iesttheAttorl"rCyGc:.ter.ll.,to]:eColll;jrlcrtlrcobjecLioll.,'.
Ilowever, until the 

-onj"<;tit" is'ui:ll:.r:nut" or the judgtnetrt

fron the ni=tii.t of colr-irrrbia i.s ol>l ai trc'] , thc ef fect of the 'l

ob jection l)y the A1*torlrc,f Gc,neral. is to' 'rloxo 
tlle 1968 atil<: nilnent

Ie{aI IY unenf orce'rb}c '

'IfyoLlhaveanyq\lcsLiorrsconeL:r:ningtlrisrnatter'
plcase .f ee: 

-ir*" to c.el.I iu,-1 1^1 . Gal'rIc (201-7?-4-'7439) ' Di'rector

of thc Sccti;; S t't':'" o! 1-lie Votiirq sccLiotr'

51\tr-iu,-r- B

SincereIY,

EXHIE]I B



U.S. Dupartrn(ut,lf .lust!

CivilRights Division

-E'Xilelr rÛ

Olftce ol the Atsistonr Attorney Generol lilothin gton, D.C. 2 0 5 30

7 oEC 19E1

Mr. AIex K. Brock
Executive SecretarY-Director
State Board of Elections
Suite I0I R.a le igh Bu iI ding
5 West Hargett Street
RaIeigh, North Carolina 276OL

De ar I1r. Brock :

This is in reference to Chapter Bg4 (S.8. .No , 87,
1981) and Chapter 82L (s.B. No. 3r3, LgBI), providing
for the reapportionment of United States Congressional
districts and for the reapportionment of the irlorth
Carolina Senale. Your submission, Pursuant to Section 5

of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c, was initially
received on July L6, I9BI, and was su1:plemented with
requested additional information on October 6, 1981.

Under Section 5, the State bears the burden of
proving the absence of both discriminatory PurPose and
effect in proposed redistricting plans. City of Rome v.
United States, 445 U.S. 156, 183 n.1B (IgSOL Beer v.
Unl=ea-States, 425 U.S. I3O, ]-4O.-4I (I976). tn oraer
Eo-Elow-i56;bsence of a racially discriminatory effect,
the State of North Carolina must demonstrate, dt a minimum,
that the proposed redistricting plans wiLl not lead to
"a retrogression in the position of raeial rninorities
with respect to their effective exercise of the electoral
franchise." Beer v. United States, supra, 425 U.S. at I4t.
lftrile the St;E-is unaeF-no-oUfTgation to maximize minority
voting strength, +-he State must demonsLrate that the plan
', f air 1y ref Ie cts the strength of Imi.nori ty ] vot ing Power
as it exists," MississiPpi v. UniteC States,_4?0 F. SuPp'
569, 5Br (D.D.c. r979r, citing Beer v' united states'
supra, 425 U.S. at I39 n.II ancl }{]: ancl City of Richmond v.
un a States , 422 U . S. 3 58 , 362 ( 1975) .

EXU'\B]1 
e



EXHIBIT C

!^le have given careful consi<leration to aII of the

forwarded materl'ars, as "ii "I"pttt-::?isrative 
reaPPor-

tionment prunli';;;t;'=. f;;-inierested citizens ' 3-Dd

orher inrormai,i";-;;;irau:l"to',rIl- 
-wittt resard to the

Senate plan, *l-'lot"-it tr'! ""tttt 
that the proPosed

redistricting plan Yu:^a""!rli"u-ov 'tl: 
l{orth caro lina

Legislaturt ptisuant to " ;;;A imeirdment to the North

carorina t'"';i;;;i;" *t':,"i';;";i;;"-:l;t no countv sharr

be divided i''''ii!-iJrlnuti"; ;i a Senate or Representative

clistrict. o= Vo'know' ot"sli'"'nlut JO: 198I' the Attorney

Generar i"t"tp'olta''i" ouittllo" i" that amen<lment under

Section 5 or-r.;;-;"[-i"e i ie"il o.L "r rea;; 42 u ' s'c' re73c'

because"[o]"i"I"tivtl:=;:;iia'j-itt".,'tul"itotriritionasaiLnst
divic1ins tt'e'-ao-'o"Lt"d -9iili;;I !:":::'io'rmation 

of senate

andHouseai"ili;;=-preaictabryrequi:;t,-"ttat'""redtothe
useof,rargl;;}.i..mep3l";i;t'icis."--b";reviewoftheIg6B
arne ndme nt ur ]o"'IiJi"a " tn'ut"ii;- ; 

: :-:: itl#:::i;I"!H: 1.".t':,:

:j:::i;i:.r:::=llr;1i.1;:-;i?:: !iBli3;;res " nccorainsry' we

have reviu*.a-tt,u Senate. pi;;-,,o. 9.Iy I,o-a"."rmine whether

the propos.g'ni"i *o"ra rIu!'^.o-" ;r"irilr;;ii;{in. the position

otraciar lT,i"iri.i.r *-r.-.i',"Iltpl.. to titit effective exerclse

of rhe "ru"ioi"i'?run"ti="," 
e""r, 9IP;1-qzs u's' at I4I' but

ar so to ." ' 
-;;;;t''li- it "?; "'€i:ffii""iitv 

' 
vot ine strensth

as ru r^lv-- 
569 (D.D_.C. I979).

490 F. SuPP ' I

Our anaLysis of th-e Senate plan- shows that in several

c ounri es .o.,"ll'u'i, tl:. u".iin- ;;s;'t 
" -l;;r "- "p" " 

i ar provi s io ns'

such as in o"ii?oilr, vlitsoil..i.,n, e"'tiu, ealucomb and t4artIn,

there are cognizarre "o,.,"u,,.,uiio.,= 
or i..i.,oriiy PerSonS w]rose

oolitica}=.'""e.1.,is.airuteaaSa'"=ui.ofthe.useofmulti-.memrer aistrilli in the pr"il=!; ::9t::;tctine 
pran' rn

Guirford, tor-"*ampl9 , . 
tt'.e-!tate has Pt;;;;"g 

-tni^3reatlon of

a three-member district witi-a-rracx popi'rution percentage of

onry 25 putttt't' Yet-"'"iIi ; ;;itry-e"I;;-;vstLm 'of si-nsre-

member ai.tri"is in that. i;;"; ;;;-s'u3ir'littiilt rikerv woul-c

be ma jority ii-"*-""u , --nl,,l?Jrl., 
- *o,ra uu.t"' r.ecognize the

ootentiar o'-ii""xs to "r""i-i"!t"t"ntJtio"-"r 
their choice'

potenLI";-:;'="' 
in wirsgn' Ndsh' 'Edgecomb' 

Martin and several

of the "o."'ti"='i" 
ptopoo"! 

'oittiitt 
I which are 'coverecl

I,' i .s i:: i? i' ;":H :i: ;; li:::, 
: 

: t!; ::";::::ii::'I3??iJ "'distric'-s tl,H:;:"";;-tn"ir choic:' ..::I:. :'-:,-,Tl i" senate
+-o erect ".']ul[lt"t"ii- 

tt'lit- "t'oit?' ' ., 
H"it asain: f "irrv-

drawn sine'i:;:;;;' -ai"Ji"i'-"'""ra -l:::1":::l:tniu" ao"' t '

iiiki: j:;i J:il',::l ;.i'",'l? Ei::?" "1. "'= 
- 

i " it'o" " c o ve r e d

counties
EX\{B\I' 

c



EXHlBl t' 'c

.3

Understandably,theseeffect'softheproposedSenate
reapportior,*"il-;i;" w-err.^tv have P:":, th" iesurt of the

Srate,s aatrereic;-a; the l;;il constitutionar amendment whlch'

as we have already found"'t""'sarily requires a submerging

of sizeab f. ui..X' .o*^,r.ities into fu rg.-"n'Iti-member di str icLs '

In view of th; "o^""rn" 
discussed above, horr""t, I am Unable

to conclude, I"-i 'ot"t unaei-tr''" Voting- Rights Act":n"t the

proposed s",'ul't i"aittti"t;;9-;i""- it iree- of a raciarry

discriminatory purpose_or efielt. Rccoiaingfy' on behalf of

the Attorney t"n"r-ul, I must interPose a. ob jLction to the \

senare plan ,ria", secrion i-oi'-it,"'votinf nigt'tt Act of r965 1

as it relates to the covered counties'

I^Iith respect to :ht Congressional redistricting' we

have also completecl t"*"'"* oi ihut submission' During the

course of our review, *" *"i-u ;;;;"nted wittr arregations that

the decision- ; exclude puit,u*' county from congressional

Disrricr No. i"t u.i-.,r" "f 
;";;"'of 

-;rnimizing minority votins

srrengrh and In aaditior, ,rur-*otivat"a 
-iV 

iacial gonsiderations '

i.e.,thea"'iit-toprecl;;;fromt'hatd-istrictthevoting
ffiEruence of rhe poIlti"";i;-;;ii-"" bl-ack community in Durham'

On the basis of 
-ti," infoti]tio., that tras been made available

to us, we remain unable to-."l1"Iur1e th;i the state's decision

to draw oistiict No. z wal *t1"rrv free from ci scriminatory

purpose .^a Liiect. In at'rit .t"'nection we f inri particularly

rroubresome ;;;-;=tru.,gurv-irileurar" shape of c9-nqressionar

District No' 2 (see ct^irviiil'il-iisl!:"oi ' 364 u's' 33e ' 34L

( 19 60 ) ) , var ici .nn" a;ileffied t6-aTlffi Durh am county fr om

thar disrricr contrary to-ii" House ct;;;Lssionat Redistricting

C"^*ittee' s recommendation'

wenotealsothatroVertheS?=tseverarredistrictings'
the black popularion p"r."ii*on"-tl 

'pitttiLt 2 has been decreased'

prior ro rh:I',;i.;;;; i;;i";;i'tiict-ins District No ' 2 was

approximately43percenti,ii.x.Under.thelgTlreapportionment
pIan, DistriLt 2 dect"ut"d to 40'2 p"i"ut't black lrcoulation'
,Ihe IgBI submirted plan would reduce iitt.,iti tt't UIicX PoPulation

in the district to 36'7 ;;;;";:-.lll; reduction in brack 
:

populationPercentd$€1.o.."'''i,,gdespiteastatewideincreaseln
the black p6pulation' i=-t=p"tlilty-'ciucial in Distrlct 2'

because it.;;;;'= in the ;;iy distri.t.;;;" b}ack voterS could

havethepotentialforelectinga.unJidu."oftheirchoice.

EXI-{\B\I- c



.EVF{IBLT C

4

We recognize that the State may want to respond
f urther to the craims that a raciarly criscriminatoiypurpose and ef fect vrere inrrolved in Lr," Legisrature.,sdecision to eircumvent Durham. However, because of thetime constraints im.oosed on the Attorney General bysection 5, and the unanswered questions stirl remaining,r cannot concrude that the l:urilen imposed on the state bysection 5 has been sustained. Rccor&ingry, r must interposean objection also to the congressionar i"iistrictinq in=ofaras it affects the covered counties. However, should thestate desire to present to us information relating to theconfiguration of District 2 which wourd address the arrega_tions mentioned above r w€ stancl ready to reconsider thr.sdetermination as provided in t}re seciion 5 gui-derines.

Of course, as provided by Section 5 of the VotingRights Actr lou have the right lo seek a decraratory jucig-
ment from the united states District court for the -oiitri.t
of corumbia that the congressional redistricting ptan hasneither the purpose nor wirl have the ef fect of-dl,.,ying o,abridging the rig)rt to vote on aecount of race, collr orm-embership in ? language minority group. However, untirthe objection is withdrawn or tha juagment from the Districtof corumbia court is obtained, the efiect of the objectionby the Attorney Generar is to make the consressionai recis-tricting plan legalIy unenforceable in the covered counties.

- rf you have any questions concerning this matter,prease feer free ro call carr r^r. Gaber (2oi/lzq-liigl ,Director of the Section 5 unit of the Voting section. Asarways, w€ stand ready to assist you in any way possibLein your reapportionnent effort.

0,.)
Wm. Bradford

Assistant Atto
CiviL Rights

Reync )- ds
rney General
D:.vision

Sincerely,

EXH\B\I 
C



CivilRights Division

EXHIBIT D

Ollru ol tb Aa!t,.nl Attunt, Gcacnl

2o lRru tgsz

Mr. AIex K. Brock
ExecuElve SecreEarY-Director
Srace Board of EIectlone
Sulte 80f Ralelgh Bulldtng
5 Weet HargeEc SEreeE
RaIelgh, Norch CaroIlna 27601

Dear Mr. Brock:

Thie ts ln reference Eo chapter 1130 - Speclal
sesslon t98I (H.8. 1428) Providlng for Ehe reaPPortlonmenE

"i-in" 
Horch iarollna Scate House of RepreBenEa.Ettlea '

ior* eubmlsslon, purauant to SecElon 5 of Che VoEtng
Ri;hc"-e"i, 42 U.5.C. L973c, was tnltlally rece!ved.on
ii;;;;b";-6, I981, and waB Ehereafcer Bupplemented wlth
addltional'lnformaclon on November 2L, I9BI'

Ae you know, oD November 30, 198I, Eo obJecclon
Lras lnterpor"a to " I968 amendmeng to che NorCh Carollna
conaEtructon whrch provlded that no counEy ahall.b: dlvlded
t; ifr" formaCton of' a Senace or Repreaencarlve dlstricc '
ln obj ecC tng 

- to tf't" I968 amendmenC , vre obeerved " ChaE Che

piottLtrlon-agatneE dlvtdtng r.hg 40 covered counElee
ln rhe formaEton of SenaEe ind House dlstrlcrs predtccably
reoulre8. and haa led EO Ehe u8e of, large multl-nember
;i;;;i;;;.; -o"i-analyara of rhe 1968 consrtEuElonar
amendmenC alro-tf,o"ad'"EhaE the uBe of euch mulCl-nember
dleErlcte n"""ttrtffy suboerges- cogntzable mlnorlcy
popularlon concenErattone-t;;; lar[er- whlce elecroraEes 

"'ThereafEer, ;; D;;ember Z,-ti8t, "il objecElotr was lncerposed
ro a propor"d--redittttctlng plan f uI t.he Scate Senare '
In obJectlng to the senate"r!"pporclonmenE plql, w€ noted
sever&L lneC*n"ur where the St'ate'a aeemlng adherence to
che 1968 .or,riii"tlonal prohiblclon agalnsc the dlvlslon
of counEteB had reeulted in Ehe submeigence of.cognizable
black coulDunlcles lnEo Iarge, Predomlnantly whlce, EUItl-
member dtecrlcEa.

Itlcliialton, D.C. 205J0

EXHIBIT D



2

gle h ave ?:,. ::::::t :?' :i:lii::il::i:ii: :it':?i.
-, ^n nubulEEeo""ti.?:l#;i";- and . 

toTI:":""ri;;'".I - 
rtre House

ELcrtt ]I-"'"11 4",:':'-- nr, "n"tyuia 
.and -Tir"i. of cne .

ii *' ?i :i:': " :: 
: li * "#". fl: :; i; r i riit:t i: i L:i i :i;:::' "'qrli .'-=::;;;ort lonmeLt :,,1,1;. s e s s i zeab !r

q n : :: "l :"0"or? . . : l : : 
II.'.: 

" :" ;?; :' i il ""* :" "! I !: :iF il;:1. "

ii'EItTi?:iiHLI iti-;it,xi :::"ti,'ac r'n''I -'':
d 

1,- :'-'.:'. iI 
- t[ I " ;, : t : l,.t [t:til:t"" ;"* "f I "; 

: 
" 
: : : '.:? i 

i i 
" 
:in,' . o

*li{n;lt*;1l':t.'m ti *l:: *n r,n';* 1,

: :: :l: ;: il' i i u;'I# i:i .l' .??li'li 
^r:: :i,"'.n1" $: ; il'r': :: :- "i"tce "lo"!ninl"i.".. "?y:t^u:.S?;: ;il::":1":l:1?

[ -liti, .?: *l I, I *, *: li?ii,'#lti'.-' :[:;,"": 
; i ; ;' I c c a

",:.?i;";=[i,ff*F
dtluclve- e;

areaB ot:'
HaIIf ax ' n

( Dlerr!cc
o"t""t E aB€

iltactt voE(

?lqri[ri*"tt"r'ruiqr'.h{Ji*r,i#i:"'#ri;""*
nosltlon
'errecrtve "'9. 9f :\fi "i;i'iigTol'
scares,,*z\-u's' 

130' 14r 
:^:::;", t,IeBr r:.,.:t concernrns

ilu*{l*1*u"*'1i:*tt*'+p;=ffi i*I'.,*
r e appo r 

: :?';-;$.1 "n ".che Srat

EXHIBIT D

tXi{lSi i. 'D

's --la



o
EXFI]BlX D

3

apatnBt dlvtdtng-counlt":^durlng t"9i9:tictlng' Ir uould

uip"", chac ttt"-sEaEe' 8'1'""oi"En" r?98' conBclcuctonar

provlslon aB ;"s;i;;-rn r5e ;;";;-redlstrlcclng efforc

r,as elmlrar conEequel:":.-li'"1--in-'r9" ;f ctrele Proscrtbed

ef f ecca , however 

"l 
3m uluUi" to con clude ' as 1 musc

under che voriir'liB[:t t:;;-tr''c the 'prooosed 
House

reepport,lonmei!'pr"i lt f:!! ;i-; i'"r!'tr' diccrlmlnaEorv

DurpoBe and "ii"tu' 
Accot;i";iy; on-u"rt"ir of che AEEorney

benlral, I musE lncerpose ;; 
';ui 

ecrrot-' Eo che Houee plan

as tE relaEe"-io che covered counclea'

Of course ' I am .f uIIy aware rhac counsel f or rhe

Scace has rr1ii""iua " a"'ii'" ;;-h;'; a 'number 
of Scace

represenEatt";;-;;;E wlcn'"t io Present addlclonar

arsumenEB "l; 
i"f;rmacton lygf;t[ll*-:]" redi'8E'rlcclng

olan. As alh'ays' -w9 "T" 
*itttng Eo llleeE wlch you or

ocher Srate;;iitr"t' ln;; "ff5rc 
Eo resolve che lssues

rhac extac "na, 
ln t1lt llglia'.," *:tting 1e schedured

for Frtd"y, !itl'iiy-2.2' i9E'' 'you can b; aseured EhaE we

wtll glve t'if 
-"o'l'"lder"tio'' to any new lnf ormar lon

DresenEed' 
'Ho*I'"i'- u""';;; ;; ;[a ttrne consrratnce

irnaer Secclon 5 ' a aeteruinarton luugE' 
'u" *tla" aE thte Elme '

rf vou have anv'quescions 9ol":'?ilE-;!l:tT"Eil''
nreaae feur'i'"!';"-;;ri ' 

carr w ' Gabe I

bir""co, of :;;'st"rr"t 5"il;lt of che VoEtng secElon'

SincerelY, /'

r.I-YL-=r:.i
Wm. Bra?flord ReYho.rts

Aes!8tanE AEto'eY 9el1raI'""4i;tr Rtghcs Dtvlslon

EXHlBtl D



L E;.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

EXTRA SESSION 1982

RATIFIED BILL

CEIPTE8 5

SEf,ATE BILL T

IX ACT TO ESTTBLISH SEIIITOBIIT DISTBICTS IID ?O IPPOR?IOII SEATS

IX THE SEIIATE ITIOIIG DISIRICTS.

The General Asselbly of llorth Carolina enacts:

section l. G.s. 120-1r !s areaded by Chapter 821 of tbe

1981 Session Lats, is rerritten to read:

ng 120-1. Senators.--(a) For the purPose of noliuatiog and

electing leubers of the Senate in 1982 aoil eleEy tro ,ears

thereafter, senatorial ilistricts are establisbed aotl seats ia the

Senate are apportioned aloDg those tlistricts ts follors:

District 2 elects one seaator aatl consists of Berti.e, cboran,

Gates, Sertforct, llortharpton, Perquilaos, Ttrrell aod lasbington

Counties.

District I elects oBe Senator and coDsists of Beaufort, Calden,

currituck, Dare, Hyrle, Panlico autl Pasquotall counties.

District 3 elects one Senator antl consists of Carteret and

Craven Counties.

District lr e-l.ects one SeDatoE aocl coasists of Oaslor Coooty.

District 5 elects one SeDator anil coosists of Duplia, Jones and

Lenoir Counties ancl Colulbia ancl Uulon Toraships in Pencler

Couut y.

Distrtct 6 elects oDe Seoator antl consists of Edgecolbe and

Halifar Counties aod the folloring tornsbips of larren tounty:

Bautree, Biver, Roanoke, aad Sirpouotl.

EX}IIBIT E



District 7 elects one Senator aatl cousists of Xer Hanover

County anit the follouing tornships of Pender count': Burqav'

Canetuck, Caslell, Gradlt' HoIIy' Long Creek' Bocky Poiot and

Topsa i I -

DistrictEelectsoneSenatorantlconslstsofGreeneaudlayne
Counties.

DistrictgelectsoDeSeuatoraa<lconsistsoff,artinandPitt
Count ies.

District 10 elects one Seoator and consists of flilsoo CouDtY;

andthefollovingtounshipsoftlashCountT:CooPers,Jacksoa,
ianoings,NashvilLe,}lorthlhitakers,oakLevel,Betloak,Rocky
iouDt, South rhitaL'ers and StoDI Creek'

Dlstrict l1 elects one SeBatoE aud consists of Franklin and

va'cecouuties;theforloringtornshipsintlashcountr:Baileys'
Casta}ia,DfYlells,Ferrells,GriffinsSthefolloringtovuships
io Iake county: Bartons Creek, LeesYiIle, Litt}e Rirer, ller

Light,andlakePorest;antlthefollouingtornshipsinlarren
CouDtI: Fishing Creek' rork' Judkins' Xutbush' Sandy Creek'

Shocco, Soith Creek' and rarrenton'

District12electstyoSenatorsanitconsistsofthefollouiug
tornshipsofCunberlandCounty:BlackRiver'carrersCreek'
cedarcreekrcro:;screekrEastoverrGray'Screel'rlaochester'
Pearces t1ilI, Rockfish aud Seveaty-Pirst'

District 1i etects tro Senators anct cousi'sts of Durhan'

Granvil}eandPersonCountiesaudlthefolloriugtornshiPsof
orange county: ce'lar Grove' Eoo and Little River'

District 14 eLects three Seoators and consists of Haraett and

senate Bilt 1



Lee cou.ties anrl Lhe forroring Tornships of rake count'Y:

Buck'ortr, Ldry, cedar Fork' EoIIy Springs' House creek' llarks

Creekr!ieredithrIidilLeCreett'Neuse'PantherBranch'BaIeiqh'

st. tlary's, St' llattherts' Svif t Creek' and Ihite oak'

District 15 elects ooe Senator and consists of Johnstoo aud

SanPson Counties'

Drstrictl6e}ectstlosenatorsandcousistsofChathal,Ioore

anilBandolpirCountiesandthefolloyiogtovnsbipsoforaBqe

couoty: Biughao, ChapeI Hill' Cheeks and Hillsborouqh'

Districtllelectstlosenatorsaudcousistsofloson,

ltontgoBery, Richoond, Scotland' StanIy auil Union Counties'

District l8 elects oDe Senator ancl consists of tsLaden'

BruosyickandColuohusCountiesancltheBeaverDaaTocgshipof

Cuoberlarrd CountY'

Drstrictlgelect.sonesenatoEandconsistsofthefolloYing

tounshipsofForsythCounty:BelersCreekaoclKerDersYil.}e;an.1

consist.softhefolLouiogtornshipsandPEeciuctsofGuilford

County:iJruceTounship,CeBterGroveTornsbip,ClayTovoship,

FeutressTornship,rriendshipPrecinctl,GreeoeTouuship,

iladisonTourrshiprllonroeTornship'GreensboroPrecinctsl0'20'

21r27r28,32r34'anC35'aniloakBiclgeTovnship'BockCreek

Toruship, and lashinqton TovoshiP'

District20electstyoSeoatorsantlconsistsofthefolloyinq

tornshipsofPorsythCountY:tbbottsCreek,Bethani'a,Broalbay,

cleuoonsvilre, L€risville, ttidctle Porr, old Eichaond' oId roun'

Saleo Cbapel, South Fork' Vieona an<t Iinstoo Tcrnships'

Senate BiII 1

EXHIBIT E



District 21 elects one Senator ancl consists of llarance and

CasvelI counties.

District 22 eI ects f our Seuators ancl consist.s of Caba rrus an'l

Ilecklenburg Couuties.

District 2J e'Iects tuo Senators anil consists of Daviclson, Davie

ancl Bovan Counties.

District 24 elects tro Senators and consists of llleghaoy,

Ashe, Rockingiran, Stokes, Surry aod IJatauga Counties.

District 25 cIt'cts t hrr-'e Senators anil consists of CIevt'IertC,

Gaston, Lincoln an,l Rutherford Counties.

District 26 elects tro Senators and coosists of Alexanlt'r,

Catavba, Iredell and Yadkin Counties.

Dlstrict 27 e'Iects tro Senators and consists of Avc'gy, Durke,

CaldyeIJ., llitchell and liilkes Counties-

District 2tl el,ects tuo Senators and coDsists of Buncorrbe,

!tcDorell, ftaCison anl Yancey Counties.

Distrrct 29 elc'cts tvo senators and consists of Cht'rokee', Clry,

GraIao, ll aytooil , Hetrdt'rson, Jackson, iacon, PoLk, Svain an4

Transylvania Count ics.

District 3C elects orre Senator ancl consists of t'loke anC Robeson

Cou nt ies.

District 31 elects oDe Senator and consists of the folloYinq

tornships and precincts of GuilfoEd CouDty: Jefferson Tornship,

Greensboro Precincts 3, {r 5r 6.7, Br 9r 11, 19r 2\r 29, and 30,

High Point Preciucts 3, 5. 6. 7, 11, 12, arrd 19, Jaoestcrn

Precincts 1, 2, anl 3, SuDDer Tounship, and Bloch 921 of Census

Tract'166 in HigL Poirrt Tovnship.

.Sena te Bi lI 1



District 32 elects one Senator andl consists of the follocinq

tornships and precincts in Guilford County: Deep River Tovnst:ip,

Friendship Prc'cinct II, Greensboro Precincts 1, 2, 12, 13, 14,

15, 16, 17, 18, 2.2,2Jr 24r 26r 31, l-l and 36, and Hiqh Point

Precincts 1, 2, 0, tl, 9, 10, 1J, l{, 15, 16, 17,- 18, 20 and '21 ,

but it does not include IJIock 921 of Ceosus Tract 166 in ttiqh

Point Tornship.

(b) The naDes and boundaries of tovnships specified in this

sectiou are as the y Here legally tlef inecl anal in ef f ect as of

January 1, 1980, anal recognized in the 1980 census.

(c) For Guilfortl CountL precinct boundaries are as shovn on

the Daps on file vith the State Boarcl of ElectioDs oD Janurry 1,

1982, io accordanci) vith G.S. 153-128(b)-rr

Sec. 2. This act is effective uPoD ratification-

In the GegeraI Asseobly read three tiles aud ratifieC,

this the llth day of FebruarY, 1982.

J,^,:,.ES C. GREEN

Jales C. Green

President of the Senate

LIS iCi'r B tiAlvlSEY

Liston B. IlatsseY

Speaker of the House of Representatives

Senate tsiIl 1

EXHIBIT E



C

\

o 
GENERAL ASSEMBL' 0F NoRTH ,o*rfro Ev t

EXTRA SESSION 1982

RATIFIED BILL

CEIPTEB II

AOI'SE EILL 1

IT TCT TO IPPOBTIOT TEE DISIBICTS OF TBE TOSIN CIBOLIII EOI'SB O?

BEPBESEITIrI YIS.

rhe General lsselbly of lorth caroliaa enects:

Sectioa 1. G.5. 120-2 i's rerritte! to reail:

rl 120-2. Eouse apportionreat soecifieil'-- (a) For the PurPose

of ootinatiug ancl electing rerbers of the iorth Caroll'ua Eouse of

Bepreseotatives io 1982 antt periotlicallt tbereafter, the State of

Iorth carolina shall b€ dirideil into the folloriug ilistricts:

District I shalt elect tlo nePreseDtatives auil shall cousist of

carden, choran, currituct, Dare, Pasguotaal, Perqui'raas, aDd

tTrrell counties; Holly Grove lornship of Gates coulty; aad Lees

tills, PIyrouth, ancl skinnersville torosblps of lashiogton

CouutY.

District 2 shall elect oDe BePres€Dtative aatl sball colsist of

Beaufort antt Hyde counties: and scuppcraong tornsbip of

tashington CountY.

District 3 shall elect three Bepreseatatives aatt shall cousist

of Craren, Lenoir, and Pallico Couoties'

District e sball elect three Bepreseotatives aud shall coosist

of Carteret aocl onslor Cooaties'

District 5 shall elect oDe Bepreseatative anil sball consist of

f,orthalptoa Couut 7; Iutliau loorls, Rorobel, Saale .Bite, and

Eootlrille Tornships of Bertie county; Gatesvitle, Ball' Baslett'

EXHIBIT E



o o
HuDtera ;i11, iintonsvi.lle, antl Beynoldsoa fornships of Gates

County; aud EarrelLsville, laaeys IecL, tlurfreesboro, St' Johns,

aud fiatoD Tornships of Eertfortl CouDty.

District 5 shatl elect one Representative antl shall colsist of

Colerain, iegrI 6iII, titchells, Ihites, and Einclsor Touuships of

Bertie county: lhoskie tornshiP of Hertfortl county; Beargrass,

Cross Eoatls, Griffias, JaresriIle, Poplar Point, Iilliats, andl

Iilliarstou Tornships of lartin CouotT; aad Betbel aod Carolina

Tornships of Pitt CouDtr-

District 7 shall elect one Sepresentative ancl shall coosist of

Brinkleyville, Butterroocl, CoDocoDpara, Enfieltt, ?aucett,

Halif ar, palrlEir Boseoeath, Scotland t{ect, antl leltlou Tornships

of Halifar Couatl; Goose tlest, Harilton, and Robersonville

Toynsbips of ltartin County; aod Fisbing Creekr Fork, SaDdy Creek,

Shocco, and SarreDtoD ?ovnships of Sarren Couoty'

District 8 shall elect four Representatires and sha1l consist

of Etlgeconbe, f,ash, aDd lilson Couoties.

District 9 shall elect tto Bepresentatives and shall consi'st of

Greene County; ancl lrthur, lytlen, Belroir, chicocl, f alklaad,

Farnville, Pountain, Greenville, Gfifton, Griresland, Pactolus,

Srift Creek, and Hinterville fouoships of Pitt Cougty.

District lO shall elect one Bepresentative anct shall consist of

Duplin and Jones Counties-

District ll shall elect tro Bepresentatives aucl sha1l cousist

of layne CoutrtY.

District 12 shall elect tro Bepresentatives anil sha11 consist

of Bladen and Sanpson Counties; and Burqar, Casrell, CoIurbia,

flouse Bill t



q

i

Botly, CanetucL, GradY,

fornships of Pentler CouutY'

District 13 shall elect

of Fetleral Point, Earnett,

Loug Creek, BoctY Point, aod Uuion

tro Bepreseatatives antl sball cousist

iasonboro, and lilriagtou torusbips of

Xeu Hauover CountY.

District ltl shalt elect one Representative aucl shall coasist of

Brunsuick County; Cape Fear Toroship of ller Hanover County; aud

fopsail TornshiP of Pender County'

Districtl5shallelectoneRepresentativeaodshallcousistof

Colurbus CountY.

District l6 shall elect three Bepresentatives ancl shall consist

of Hoke and gobeson couoties; and Spring HiIl, sterartsville, and

Iiltiatsoos Tornships of Scotlantl CouDty'

District t7 shalI elect oBe Eepresentative and shalI coasist of

Block 901 and Enureration District 53q of census rract 3q io

!tancbester Tornship, Block 901 aucl BDureration District 535 of

census Tract 3tl in Seventy-First rounship, Block 901 of census

lract 34 in CarYerts creek Tornship, aad cross creek Precincts 15

antl 17 (except for Block 107 of census tract 2q) io cross creek

TornshiP of cuLberlanrl CouDtlr'

District 18 shall elect four Representatives ancl shall consist

of the rerainder of curberlancl couDty not includecl ia District

17.

District 19 shalI elect tro Representatives and shaII consist

of Harnett antl Lee Coonties'

District 20 shall elect tvo Bepresentatives antl shaIl cousist

of Frankliu ancl Johuston Counti'es'

House Bill 1

EXHIBIT E



. of Deep Biver Toruship, Priendship lorosbiP, Bigh Point Tornship,

a Jatestorn Precincts 1 aod 3. aad soutb sulDer Preciuct of

t Guilford couaty-

District Zg shall elect oDe Bepresentative anil shall coasist of

gelers creel an6 saler chapel Tornships of ?orsyth couaty autl

Xorth Center Grove precinct, South tadi.son Precinct, llorth lonroe

Precinct and Bruce, Cla7, GEeeDe, Jeffersou, oak Ridge, Bock

creek and tashiogton Tounships of Guilfortl couoty'

District 30 shal. L elect oDe Bepresentative aotl sball consist of

Albright, Bear creek, aad Gulf Tounships of Chatbar Couuty; ancl

lsheboro, colericlge, colurbia, Frankliaville, Liberty' autl

Rasdlelan Torusbips of Bandolph County'

District 3t shall elect oDe BepreseBtative antl shall consist of

lloore CountY.

District 32 shall elect oDe Representative ancl shalI consist of

Bichrontl couDty; aDil Laurel Hill Tornship of Scotland County.

District 33 shalI elect oDe Bepreseutative antl shall consist of

ADsoa aucl llontgoBerl CouDties'

District 34 sball elect four Representatives anil shall consi'st

of Cabarrus, Stanly, an<l onioa Counties'

District 35 sball elect tro BepreseDtatives ancl shall cossi'st

of Rouan CountY.

District 36 shall elect eight Representatives antl shall cousist

of ltecklenburg CouotY'

District 37 shalt elect three Representatives antl sbaIl consist

of Daridson aud Davie couuties: antt Eagle iills an<l oaion Grove

tornshiPs of Iredell couott'

House BiIl I
EXHIBIT E



oo
District 38 shall elect one Eepreseatative and sha1l consist of

BacI Creek, EEOUeE, cedar Grove, coocord' GraDt' Level cross' lleu

Hope, Ier ;arket, PleasaDt GroYe, Bichlantl, tabernacle, ?riaitT'

antl Uoion Tounsbips of Bantlolph Couaty'

District 39 shall elect five Bepreseatatives ancl shall coasist

of lbbotts creek, gethaniae Broadbay, cleoronsrille,

f,eroersville, Levisville, liildle Pork, oltl Bichrontl', old ToYn'

south Fork, Yienna, and linston toroships of ForsTth countt'

District ll0 shall elect three Bepreseotatives aud sha11 cousist

oflllegbanyrtsheraudsurrycouDties;BigCreek'Danbury'
ileadous,PetersCreek,QoakerGaP,Sauratoro,andradkin

Toruships of Stokes County; ancl Balct lountaiu, Bloring BocL' Blue

Ritlge, Boone, tsEusby Forl, CoYe Creek ' Elk' leat Calp' lf er Biver'

North Fork, stony Pork, and tatauga Tornships of tatauga county'

District 41 shall elect tro RePreseDtatives and sha11 eonsist

of IiLkes and Yadkin counties; aacl Graltneys, Sharpes' and sugar

Loaf Tornships of tleraocler County'

District 42 sball elect oDe Bepresentative ancl shall consist of

Bethany, Chanbersburg, CoDcord, CooI Spriag' ller Sope' olin'

sharpesbuEg, statesville, aud Turnersburg Tornships of Iretlell

Count y.

District 03 shalI elect one Bepresentative antt shaLl consist of

iliIIers Toynship Of llerander countt; calclvell, catarbar BBtl

ilountain creek Toyoships of catarba county; and Barringef r cotlclle

creek, Davidson, Fallstoro, ancl shiloh Tornships of Iredell

Couot Y.

House Bill 1



District 04 shaIl elect four Bepresentati'ves and shall coosist

of Gaston aotl Lincolu Coooties'

District ll5 shall elect tro BePreseBtati'ves aud shall coosist

of Lorer ?ork ancl Upper Pork rornships of Burke County; and

BandytsrClinesrHictoryrJacobsPork'aDdllertoolornshipsof
Catarba CouutY.

District 116 shalI elect three Bepresentatives antl shall coosist

of lvery, caldrell, and ttitchell counties: EIlentlale' Little

Biver, Taylorsvi IIe, antl Iittenberg Tornships of llerancler

countT; Drerel , lcarcl, Jonas 8ictge, Lorer creek, sroky creek' aucl

UpperCreekTovnsbi.psofBurkeCounty;ao<lBeaverclal,Laurel

Creek, and Shauneehar Tornships of Iataoga County'

District 47 shalI elect one Representative aod sball cousist of

Liuville,LoveladY,tlorgantoo,Quakerlea<lor,an<lSiIverCreek

TornshiPS of Burke CountI'

DistriCt tlB shall elect three RePreseDtatives ancl shall consist

of Cleveland, Po1k, ancl Butherf ortl Counties'

District 49 shalI elect oDe EePreseDtative ancl shalI consist of

ncDouell and lanceY Counties'

District 50 shalL elect one Bepresentative aocl shalI consist of

BIue Ritlge, Clear Creek, Edneyville, GfeeD River, HenilersoDville,

asd lills River Tovnships of Heuclerson County'

District 5l sball elect four Bepresentatires antl shalL consist

ofBuncoabeancTrausylYaniaCounties;andCrabCreekandHooPers

Creek Tornships of Hendersoo County'

District 52 sball elect tro Bepresentatives aod shalt consist

of Hayrootl, Jacksoo, ttaclisou, antl sraia countiesS antl stecoah ancl

House BilL I EXHIBIT E



IellorCreekTornshipsofGraharCounty.
District53shallelectoDenePresentativeagtlshallconsistof

cberolee, clay, aDtl tlaco! counties: auil cheoah Tovnship of Grahar

Couut Y.

(b)theDalesanclbounclariesoftornshipsspecifiedinthis

section are as they reEe legally definecl and in effect as of

JaDuar,l,l98o,anclrecogoizedintbe1980I,.5.ceDsus.
(c} Por Guilforcl ancl Culberlaotl Counties, ptecinct boundaries

areasshornontheraPsonfileuiththeStateBoarclof

ElectioasonJanuarylrlgszrinaccortlancerithG's'163-128(b)'
Ifalychangesinprecinctboundariesarerade,theaEeasotr

thelapshallstillregaininthesateEouseDistrict.n
sec. 2. This act is effective upon ratificatiou'

IDtheGenerallsserblyreailthreetilesandratifiecl,

this the 11th daY of FebruarY' 1982'

JAMES C. GREEN

Jares C. Greeu

Presiclent of the Sesate

_ LlsTCi,l 9_ji\:1S_E_Y--

Liston B. BanseY

Speaker of the Eouse of Bepresentatives

Eouse BiIt 1



ffi CivilRights Divisictn

EXH]BII F

,Stltr cl fia lrrrirnLru tnvat @ '

Jerrlg Lecngrd; Esgu!'re
Jerris Lqcr'.arrl' f Aisoel a'-*g 7 P' C '
900 Sevent'eenth g+-reee' Nl{

suite 10?0
*aahinEtt>n' D'C' 30005

EXH\B\T, 
F

r*rratrr:r. b.Clfjra
q - iq -TL

uear Hf. leonsrdl

This is ln ref ezenc{-Eo yqut. gubilggion art beholf

of the Statn cf HqrEh Crroitne tf the-rediscrlctiig
plana Eor tne-rior":b Crroiii""i"""t" (Senate Elil f i and

the sttte.Houge of Repr''*e;!+il::"-1l?:"" BtII I!' and 3

]a'* ctiangirrg'ih*-"""aiq"i-c f tling peried and pri:tury
eLectipn dat.l"iot 1943 ti"u=L glri 3i' Your euosigEion'

pursuant Lo ;;";;;"-= a! i't'"-rs..,tina |l9hts Rci of I?55'

as aaended, ;;-;:i'c' -I97let 
b'ae received on Feuruar]'

231 1983, .,.i-,i* supple=",,t*e vith reo.L,e3t.ed additlgnal
inferc.sr.ian ie"*rree- ln.ep;li-!l* llli:, As requPs;sc ' YB

have given y;;;=;;;Jr""ion expeoitec consider':ti'on'

AE the outEet, ve beiie'.'e lt.ig gpprcPriste."o

revl*u '"""ni s;;;i.;; s."tJiitio::s interpoeed bi' ihe

AtLorne). a*n"''"i-io:""i ing-'"i'anBe' ,ln^ HL\rth carelins r

insaruuch ag the bases for'thcse ohJectlcns provide c

relevanr "oni**t 
lor o,r. riri"" of 'the suFttrlt"ed Senlbt

lrnu Equse =*ji"irietlnq 
pion*. A3 i,oo ino*. oft '\"cvrffi

-1C, l9AL, ilfl objecEton-*.i-tn**tpo"-*O to a 195? BRendment

to t|.rt Nortlr iiioii''o co"Iril"irln tF'at prohibit?d Lhe

scatt troa dividtrrg *oo"ii"* during redistr!'ct':'ng or- tho

Bouee ccd senate' QEtr ";i+ilii :t-:l:t amendnenc ehov*d

that ecr'hereic"-io -'f'* prot'i'lit lcn necessarily rrl'1irix*d

the use oi lerge rtrr'rrei -t;;;;;-dlstri';te' tli*l-^t-l-:"tn
hai the pt"Ol"iibi* sf {ecl of s::b*er'lina L}re !'otrng

srrength *f-;;;itsenre "ii*I".totlp"a 
c'i black cititens

ehrou-;rreut the StEt3'



EXfllB\T, 
f

Gn Dtctnbc E 1' IBP'I' obiecti?f" v'rr1 interfl3eetl to

the Senatt ";;il;l1o'rnrnt'prit":"? 
t?'tn* ConqreE'sional

rcdistrteting ii;;: Iilh-riaf""t :? the senrte Fi:-';1 '

our enalyeis =;;;;'J th3! tr'"-bt'''r"'$ 'riLi*rtce c'D t'!'rt "'

constjtotio"li";;;;tfi:ion aeilns" diuir'rlr:s trosct reg

ha<t re$ulte* in' " surrF.Brg*n"t["oi-Ufi"i- vo'-inE strenqih

irr severai correr;d aseas oi 
- iL* sta*.e ' sur'rEeq'denLlY ' on

Janur,rtr lD, iE;ll-"l cb]"tii""-uis' lnterooserl to Lh*

House Pren #;;;;* lt' i:l;-"'+uta h3've risurt-ec in a

aubrergenceoi-pio"r-.,oot'ingiii*"'1rl''-$r-ri'hthEStnEEe
and ED)rse +ai*r-iia--*,rpioyEe" i";;: 

-,'1ri-**'oeE 
6 ! s t ri cts '

i forseesb:.e-ec"sec*en!9-l!-*ii-itli::= 
aihere::ce dur:nq

rediatr:.cting tg the fgS;-"o"ecitulionetl amenCment'

Follo*ingti:eceobieet'io'tst?thels;lconetitri{iorral
an,end:lenE. -i'A to- tfl= *"tiiii-reaFE'c'rtionl:en!* -?lEns '' lho

Stute of no,Ii i;,;1 inu.r;;;r-".uh. tr.," n€lJ redisLrlcirn9

plsns Un6et j'Juir="1o" n*I*", 
--ir, ';ohlrol-'t t{} the earlier

lciec^'-ed-to ;i;;;; thz Pj';;; eivelose* in ieuE bv LrrE

stlt+ '1t"1der;;;;;-;i 
ti'''li** ' conscquentii" a =in'pie

E'rrpaiiscn or"i.;';.;;;:'ir-=i=lrEt-ics ln'in'c ";id' an'i the

ner*Iv-p'o;-'"a-;";u-q:::-;;;;;;-t' :i'*d lisnt Gl ulr*LhiE

t.he sui:,mittia-p!*no 
.ii}'r-. i*i io.t-:;;-"i'inqth. of biac}:

r.or !n.i Eic:.'r-as -i!^**::ti;i' e.'==E-:{-@ "' L;::i'"td

Stai€gr €t& f

'Ii're submitte'i p'Il:is ege' { =u!stsntial 
it'"prcve-

meni 6r..Gts tr.,*-oui*it+t-to.'pLt"= .o:::::I' .],""ur::i:ti r "-
:?;: r*' ; 1 

* i ;'l ?i * l:li :i ii .::: :ilri,i I ;: :':'ii 
; *i ; :' 

.

ii r*:: * ;[.:"': ];: :, "' ?i :.: i r I ul:t:, 
; 

I :;' .I ==ili 
" l';;;i 5u,a - :::" Li;"Il. ; -ln ti ; ": 

; : i: i;l; ; l';' .:i:": :; i n s r c

6^-it " oLher --*?"S==tlon i, =E thL.rE'P pltns
Io:"-aionable ieseure L:nd

af fe'st s+lr'+ ai the icrt.rtt*f 
-"o'Jnties: ot; sii*ily- describe

belov ,n" n'"Ii''fl= 
- i,."t* oE.,':ctrelons'

EXH\B\T. 
f



EXH\B\1.:

-a

lllthreBPecttotbesrrh,,rr.ittedS+:.iatePIal,i|*
srare pi"i6"i" i" create o Tojoriry bisci. clietriet in
the FprtheaEt iEcA. ?hiC dislrict, No ' 2 , corr+'iin$ re

iilzi-"i;;t p";;iirion. grr nnslysts rihr:ws that duric"j
t,he senate neoistricting co*.nittee I g corrsiceriii.if,n of
if,i*-dlstrict ir- was vtdtty recaqnireC. t'hat ec irist P

551 blach poPulatlon vas nl"=sss;y tn this dis:rict' if
blac!. vOtEft *u." !o tlave a rer*eirgb')c cliance af elecrir'9
a Cendi.date of their Choice arrd the rec'=rrf hefor* ug

Ioil.i",= sot,iianL la I evidence thet suf-h s csmpac" ' nDn-

gerrynDndered die rrict' easi 1y cculd be dra'*n ir' th i:;
a16a. tlor';rit,iianOinq thete fsct-s' how€ver' th+ State
tnacted 'a pf an rrh i eh r 35 noteC abcve r FiroviCes for only

" Sf -:t blici( popdlauion PerccnLage

F,eapecting thf, HssE€ F1+n' !h"-Siile Frarnoees to
creste o$e *;;;t;-'""'r*r d1r'er j'ct in Cu;aberland 'lountl'r
with thQ remaiider of th+ co,rnly's pc5:ulation to Giect 4

EepfESe,.rt"f i.u*=-it, a nul t1-ner,-hlr disirit--u ' h'triIe the

slngle-raenber d:.s+-rict aFFearE !o. l'-' 61'astrhElmingil'
bieck in itr si;;;t-votini F#Fr';:it:9" i4ue to tie inciu$rcn
crf +*rsditional]! nGn-vet'ig' propulatio! f I?3-F::t trrsg9 ) '
the Stat'e's pLai leaves nesriy tl:ler-f eurths o!
Fayettevi]leiJ s]*sk "";;;i;'y 

uith ttreir voti.ng Esrengt'h

sr.:hs+rqeCinthe'--bitelo=1'"titynulti'-menbt:rdi:r-r!ct'
s€vcrE.l- reasonabie af terolt j-eei to the StatB's proposai sre

available, incl,.rd i ng an" 
-,:ii*ing 

?l_ : s*csnd singIe-r',ir5::..
di*trlct shere!n blacl,. "oi*i, -^ou1d havr g lair opfortunlty
of , sL a mininun, strc'ngi;-;nttutncing the oDte":re of the

.t*"Licn in that Cistrict'

Ia light ci the sboue, f a* unabJe !-L\ conc!':ii:,.ot I
nust under i;"ii"" i--it the '.rD+"ihg tight.s &ct, t,h$L \"rs

SenaEe and Heuse rea'.E>ortf J"""t'- if "t ! 3r€ f rtt c'f a raciul l1'

Ciscriminatcrf purPase aiO *f ie:"-' e'ccoralng'Ly ' cn bchsi{ of

th* ALLorneY General, I nrst intrrpcst +n cUjecticn to hcih

pians '

fffirdlt F



E{fle1t' 
t

p r n a r r,{ ;.}i 
"? 

;i* :,:" i"" :i!il:' .i: ;'i,??n i.^' l.i, "ncsn{tldate tiling PFY}?o.:":-;; -"il:ro-.n*noi$ ort €ant[rt-
orirnarl'.r="iioiutitiii'ba beld' Thoge chsngcs or* €

Lent u*on tiro'i.-"t"-"ltrt*i*g Sr+cleqranc€ *i the S*nate

and House t=ii""iliitrig-pi;;;7 gri e'v'Pnts ';hich haa not

ueL tahen Pl;;;'--a"""lci'stit -it"f:--::ft 
vi':"r that ti:€:re

Lhrne.c* "t* ill'trFt f cr 
's.'-c-t-ion 

5 rsvierr' See ' €' ! I 3

38 c;P,R. 5:,:;: 
-tt;- siand ira'r3 'to' 

e*c;'xine L',!ese cnarrgeY

on irtr expeOiiea Uorls toq*ib;"'vii'h any s'er:ificaticrrs ti

thr senBre "rJp.I*i!-pt"i"-irrnt 
the stite n*v w'-tn t='

frake.

Qf courEe' $s provi-ded by S*cii''''n 5 oi tht !t-:binq

RiqhtshCtliol-i";"ir,eiiqF,tilr.-ceekade,:iaratorll
iucrnent rrol"lrl*-u"ii"e i'lit*" oi:-:t-"t cc'urt fsr the

bi"iri*t or'Eoi'*ut' that +-hege ='ot1ng changes h*vs

nelther the Futro*t loE.niir hF'/9 tlre €f iec"- o! cenyrng

oE a'rridq lngt;'i!- iigna to raee Drr 
' 
account' of ract '- ' 

color I

er ner*bet=nip'ii i-l"ie*Js;=T;l.::t!f--rauF'^ rn aidr!rcn'

rhe Fr++ef ,i[='ioi ii.=" eii,i;ristrati-sn- ef section 5 i -ie

c.P'B*51-?l;;l-"i*-(ti'"!'i:i''erdEl'2ilP+ritvoato
trcquest tne-rliqrney. Eenerai ic' rectnsider the c'"'i*ri-ion'

BoldevEr, until rhe o-a:""iii" i: ;l:htlrau: cr t-he jr:d3rrtnt

f roa t,ht Ai=iii"'--of .lof'rnlt" csurr ie obt*ir'rtdr ihe

effeci cf ti*'iu:*"!r""-['] 'n= 
Attarntv cen*ral !p t'>

nake thz t*if ';-i'i"ri"'=* 
piinu"i'-: tt'* s'*n*t= and 5*-':t*

flous€ of Repres*ntatirreE iiEarty unenforceabLe ln tne

covered trcunties'
'r ( "rcu hase rn)' quegtiprre ccncrrnlng ti:ls let:er'
., I

oleage t""i-iti*'*"-;"Ii-;;:-]' 
-cergra Eebert ' the tr"+'prh€!

in tnt voting section tiuj-it'*-gzri) rhc is ++*ign=c t.c

thls ,Ia[:er-

S incerelY,

i\F>**s=-u{\-i^'-:
t.:r.' d<E=ffii-='ff=i=-.=

argief rni ittDCt"Eil 6€n'era'l
Civii F,lgh'-s Dr';rs:.e'.i

i-*q-

EX-F]TBII F



r{
l.

\

EXHIBIT G

of Iorth Caroliua euacts:

G.s. l2O-2. as rerritteD by chapter

is areoded by rerritiag Districts

ll, Ertra

17 asd 18

GENERALASSEMBLY0FNoRTHCAR0LINA
SECOND EXTRA SESSION 1982

RATIFIED BILL

It lct lo APPOBtror

BEPBBSE[TATI Y 85.

tbe Geoeral AsselblY

CBIPTEB 
' .

EOOSE EILL T

A BI,LL TO BE EXTITLED

lEB DISTEICTS OT I8E IOBTH CIBOLIIT EOUSE OT

Section 1 '

Sessi.on Lars of 1982.

to read:

nDistrictlTshallelecttloBePEeseatativesaltlshallconsist

ofBlockgorautlEnurerationDistrict530ofCensusrract3|lin

!anchesterTornship,BlockgolantlEnureratiouDistrict535of
CensustEact34inse'eDtl/-Pirstrornship,BlocLg0lofceDsus

fract 3ll ia Carrerrs Creek Tornsbipt CEoss Creel' Precincts 1' 3'

5rg.13r16117rand19'springLakePrecinct'lorgaotonBoa<l1

Precinct,BeaYerLaL'ePrecioct,IestareaPrecinct,aldthatpart
ofCeosusTract33.o2inPrecioctSeventT-Firstl.tDypartof

CrossCreeklorushiprhi.chra'beentirellsurrouutleclbr
iorgantonEoatllPrecioctsballalsobeintheDistrict.Blocl

3o4ofceDsusTract26ofCrossCreekTornshipisootintbe

District.
DistrictrsshallelectthreeBepEeseDtativesaatlshallcoasist

oftherelaiuderofCurberlaatlCountylotiocludetlioDistsict

17- r

EXHIBIT G



sec. 2. rhis act is effectire uPon ratificatiou.

In tbe Geoeral lsserbly read three tires and ratified,

this the Z?th daY of lPril, t982-

Jales C. Green

Presiilent of tbe Senate

tlgloN B. BAMSEY _
Listoo B. BarseY

Speaker of tbe House of RePr€seDtatives

House BilI 1



oor*rRAL 
Asst*rrrr'0, *orrr ro*0,-,,1?

SECOND EXTRA SESSION 1982

RATIFIED BILL

lx lcT TO

CHIPTEN 2

SBNATE BILL 1

tilEtD CHAPTBB 5 Or TBE SESSIOI LAIS (TIRST EITEI

sEssIoN , 1982) BEDISIEICTIXG IHE IOBrn CtBoLIta sElllTE-

rhe Genraral AssenblI of Uorth Caroliaa eaacts:

Section l. G.S. 120-1 (a) as contained io Section 1 of

chapter 5 of the sessi.on Lars (Ertra session, 1982) is aoended

by:

(a) deleting the folloriog language:

rDistrict 2 elects one seBator aotl coosists of Bertie, cboran,

Gates, Hertford, tlorthalpton, Perqui3aDs, Trrrell aotl tasbingtoo

Couoties.

District 1 elects one senator aacl consists of Beaufort, carden'

corrituck, Dare, Hyde, Parlico aotl Pasquotank counties-

District 3 elects oue Sesator antl cousists of Carteret and

CEaYen CouDties- n

and inserting in I j-eu thereof :

nDistrict 1 elects one Senator and consists of calden,

Currituck, Dare, Hyde, Pasquotaok, Perquirans antl Iyrrell

Counties; the folloriog tornships of Beaufort County: Bath' Long

lcre, paDtego, 8ichlaud, autl rashingtoo; aod the folloring

tounships of Hashiogton county: scupperoong ancl skinnersrille'

District 2 elects oDe Senator and coosists of Bertie' Cbouaa'

Gates, flertford, and xortbarptoo Couoties: the folloring

tornships of Eclg ecorbe CourtY:

EXHIBIT G

3 (0pper Conetoe), aDd { (DeeP



a
a

Co

aotl Scotland xeck; the folloriug

Goose Xest, Hatiltou and

ltills and Plyrouth lornships of

of

I

Creel); th Ilouing toroships of Ealifar County: DOCODDaTa,
oefo

HaIifax, Palnyra, Boseneath,

torostrips of ltar tia Courtf :

Bobersouville; and the Lees

lashingtoo Couaty.

District 3 elects one SeDator and consists of Carteret, Cravetr

and Panlrco Counties.n;

(b) deletiog ttre folloriug:
trDistrict 6 elects one Seaator aod consists of Edgecorbe and

Halifar Counties and the follouiag tornships of liarreu' Couoty:

Hartree, ttiver, Boauoke, and Sirpouatl-r

and insertiag in Iieu thereof:
rDistrict o elects ooe Senator and consists larren Couoty;

(Tarboro), 2the toJ.louing tovnships of Edgeconbe CountI:

(Lorer Conetoe) , 5 (Lorer Fishinq Creek), 6 (Upper Fisbing

Creek) , 7 (Suift Creek) , 8 (Sparta), 9 (Otter Creek) , 10 (Lorer

Tovn Creek), l1 (ralnut Creek), 12 (fiocky !ountl, t3 (Cokey), 14

(Upper Torn Creek) ; ancl the folloring tounships of Halifax

County: Brinkleyville, Butterrood, Enfield, Faucett, LittLeton,

Eoauoke Bapids, dod leldou.x;
(c) deleting the folloring:

tr Dis trict

Count ies. rl

and inserting
oDistrict 9

Cbocorini t y

tourrships of

9 elects one Senator and cousists of llartin ancl Pitt

in -Lieq thereof :

elects oue Seuator and consists of Pitt CouotyS the

touushrp of Eeaufort County; andl the folloviuq

flartin County: Beargrass, Cross Boads, Griffins,

Seaate Bill 1



a
a

rstoD n.
-t

a

(

Jaresville, Poplar Poj-ot, rillials, aod uillia

(d) tteleting the foJ'Ioriug:
f,District l0 elects ote Senator aod consists of Iilson Couoty;

aad the f ollouing tolnsbj.ps of llash County: Coopers, Jackson,

Eanoings, NashviIIe, f,orth Uhitakers, Oak Leve1, ttecl Oak, Rocky

llount, South Ihitakers and Stony Creek' rr

aad inserting io lieu thereof:

rDistrict l0 elects one Senator and consists of tilsoo County;

aud the folloring totnships of llash couDty: coopers, Jackson,

IashviIle, North t bitakers, Oilk Level, Red Oak, Eocky l{ount,

Soutb rhitakers aod Stony Creek.r; and

(e) delet-rng the foIloring:
xDistrict I 1 elects one Seuator and consists of Franklin and

Yance Couoties; tne rolloving tornships in Nash County: Baileys,

CastaIia, Dry IelIs, PerrelIs, Griffins; the follouinq tornships

in Iake CouDty: Jartous Creek, Leesville, Little Bivere tleu

Light, and lake Forest; and the folloring touuships in Iarren

couBtlr: .Fisiriog creek, Fort, Judkins, Nutbush, sandy creek,

Shocco, SDitLr Creek, and larrentoo.i:

aad inserti.ug in iieu thereof:
nDistrict 1 I elects one Senator and cousists of Franklin and

Yauce Couoties; tire rollouing tornsbips in Nash CouDtY: BaiJeYs,

Castalia, DEy leIJ,s, FerrelIs, GriffiDs, and tlanDings; anfl the

folloring toruships is take county: Bartons creek, LeesYiIIe,

Little Biver, Nel tight, and Iake Forest-n

Seoate tsill I

EXHIBIT G



I ,O 2- This act is effectire oPo! Eatifilion'

In the Geoeral lsserbly read three tiles and ratifietl'

this the 27tb day of rPril. 1982'

JAMES C. GREEN

Jares C. Greeo

President of the Seoate

LISTON B, RAMSEY

Listoo B- RarseY

Speaker of tbe Hous€ of RePEeseutatives

Senate 8i1f 1

I



t



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify Ehat I have this d?y served the fore-
goin13 Motion- for Summary Judgm_e_n! .trqol all other counsel by

[f"",[ng a "opy-of qeme in th6 United States ?ost 0ffice,
pos t,lge prePaid, addres sed to:

\

James Inla1lace, Jt., Esq.
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Affairs
Attorirey General's 0f fice
North Carolina Department of Justice
Post Office Box 629
Rateigh, North Carolina 27602

Jerris Leonard, Esg.
KathLeen l{eenan, Esq.
Jerris Leonard & Associates, P.C'
900 lTth Street, N.W.
Suite 1020
WashingEon, D.C. 20006

J. LeVonne Chambers, Esq'

chambers, F;;;";;;; warr, wa1las, Adkins & Fu1ler, P.A.
git South IndePendence Boulevard
Cn"rlotEe, North Carolina 28202

Jack Greenberg, Esq.
Napoleon Williams, Esq.
Lani Guinier, Esg.
NMCP Legal Defense Fund
l0 Columbus CircIe

I suite 2030
. New York, New Yo::k 10019

Arthur J. Donaldson, Esq.
Burke, Donaldson, Holshouser & Kenerly
309 North Main Street
SalisburY, North Carolina 28L44

Robert N. Ilunter, Jr. , Esq'
AttorneY at Law
201 West Market Street
Post 0ffice Box 3245
Greensboro , NorEh .C-3rolina 27 402

,Ha ton Eon;- ,

ti,;.:,u;iar-f,.fuofney. fOf P laint if f S

450 NCNB PLaza
Winston-Salem, N.C . 27L0L
(919) 723-L826



I



, ta CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this day served the fore-
going }lemorandurn Supporting Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary
Judgment under RuIe 56 upon all other counsel by placing a
copy of same in the United States Post Office, posLage prepaid,
addressed to:

James Wa1lace, Jt,, Esq.
Deputy Attorney General for LegaI Affairs
Attorney General's Office
North Carolina Department of Justice
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, Norrh Carolina 27602

Jerris Leonard, EsQ.
Kathleen l{eenan, Esq .

Jerris Leonard & Associates, P.C.
900 17th Street, N.W.
Suite I020
Washington, D.C.20006

J. LeVonne Chambers, Esq.
Les Iie l{inner, Esq
Chambers, Ferguson, Watt, Wallas, Adkins & Fuller, P.A.
951 South Independence Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Jack Greenberg, Esq.
Napoleon Witliams, Esq.
Lani Guinier, Esq.
NMCP Legal Defense Fund

Suite 2030
New York,.Nevr Yo::k 10019

Arthur J. Donaldson, Esq. .

Burke, Donaldson, Holshouser & Kenerly
309 North Main Street
Salisbury, North Carolina 28L44

Robert N. I{unter, Jr. , Esq .

Attorney at Law
201 I,Jest Market Street
Post Office Box 3245
Greensboro, North Carolina 27402

This 20th day of December, Lg82.

t,"{-ALJ-UI t,t, {'Q-, L/,,

450 I{CNB PLaza
Winston-Salem, N. C. ZTIOL
(91e) 723-L826

orney for Plaintiffs