et
al
virginia
state
board
elections
et
argued
december
decided
march
census
virginia
state
legislature
drew
new
lines
state
legislative
districts
goal
ensuring
district
black
population
bvap
least
certain
voters
filed
suit
claiming
new
districts
violated
fourteenth
amendment
equal
protection
clause
state
legislative
officials
state
intervened
defend
plan
district
rejected
challenges
districts
concluded
voters
shown
precedent
requires
race
predominant
factor
motivating
legislature
decision
place
significant
number
voters
within
without
particular
district
miller
johnson
held
race
predominates
conflict
traditional
redistricting
criteria
race
supp
thus
confined
predominance
analysis
portions
new
lines
appeared
deviate
traditional
criteria
remaining
district
district
found
race
predominate
lines
constitutional
legislature
use
race
narrowly
tailored
compelling
state
interest
particular
found
legislature
good
reasons
believe
racial
target
necessary
district
avoid
diminishing
ability
black
voters
elect
preferred
candidates
time
violated
voting
rights
act
see
alabama
legislative
black
caucus
alabama
held
district
employed
incorrect
legal
standard
determining
race
predominate
districts
pp
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
state
without
sufficient
justification
separat
ing
citizens
different
voting
districts
basis
race
miller
courts
must
exercise
extraordinary
caution
adjudicating
claims
racial
gerrymandering
since
legislature
always
aware
race
draws
district
lines
aware
demographic
factors
shaw
reno
shaw
plaintiff
alleging
racial
gerrymandering
thus
bears
burden
show
either
circumstantial
evidence
district
shape
demographics
direct
evidence
going
legislative
purpose
race
predominant
factor
motivating
legislature
districting
decision
requires
proving
legislature
subordinated
traditional
districting
principles
racial
considerations
miller
supra
district
misapplied
controlling
law
two
principal
ways
pp
first
district
misunderstood
relevant
precedents
required
challengers
establish
prerequisite
showing
racial
predominance
actual
conflict
enacted
plan
traditional
redistricting
principles
made
clear
parties
may
show
predominance
either
circumstantial
evidence
district
shape
demographics
direct
evidence
going
legislative
purpose
miller
supra
race
may
predominate
even
plan
respects
traditional
principles
shaw
hunt
shaw
ii
state
theory
case
irreconcilable
miller
shaw
ii
state
insists
harm
racial
gerrymandering
lies
racial
per
se
grouping
voters
race
together
otherwise
lack
shared
interests
constitutional
violation
racial
gerrymandering
cases
stems
racial
purpose
state
action
stark
manifestation
miller
supra
state
also
contends
race
prohibited
effect
district
lines
legislature
drawn
lines
accordance
traditional
criteria
proper
inquiry
however
concerns
actual
considerations
provided
essential
basis
lines
drawn
post
hoc
justifications
legislature
used
legislature
construct
plethora
potential
maps
look
consistent
traditional
principles
race
overriding
reason
choosing
one
map
others
race
still
may
predominate
conflict
inconsistency
may
persuasive
circumstantial
evidence
tending
show
racial
predomination
rule
requires
challengers
present
kind
evidence
every
case
practical
matter
kind
evidence
may
necessary
many
even
cases
may
cases
challengers
establish
racial
predominance
without
evidence
actual
conflict
pp
district
also
erred
considering
legislature
racial
motive
extent
challengers
identified
deviations
traditional
redistricting
criteria
attributable
race
factor
racial
gerrymandering
claims
proceed
alabama
supra
courts
divorce
portion
district
lines
whatever
relationship
traditional
principles
rest
district
courts
may
consider
evidence
pertaining
area
larger
smaller
district
issue
ultimate
object
inquiry
legislature
predominant
motive
district
design
whole
explanation
particular
portion
lines
must
take
account
districtwide
context
holistic
analysis
necessary
give
proper
weight
districtwide
evidence
stark
splits
racial
composition
populations
moved
district
use
racial
target
pp
district
best
positioned
determine
remand
extent
proper
standard
race
directed
shape
districts
race
predominate
whether
strict
scrutiny
satisfied
pp
district
judgment
regarding
district
consistent
basic
narrow
tailoring
analysis
explained
alabama
challenger
succeeds
establishing
racial
predominance
burden
shifts
state
demonstrate
districting
legislation
narrowly
tailored
achieve
compelling
interest
miller
supra
assumed
state
interest
complying
voting
rights
act
compelling
interest
state
justifies
predominant
use
race
redistricting
basis
need
comply
voting
rights
act
narrow
tailoring
requirement
insists
legislature
basis
evidence
support
choice
made
alabama
state
must
show
action
actually
necessary
avoid
statutory
violation
legislature
reasons
use
race
needed
order
satisfy
voting
rights
act
ibid
error
district
conclusion
legislature
sufficient
grounds
determine
calculus
employed
district
necessary
avoid
violating
facts
found
legislature
performed
kind
functional
analysis
district
necessary
result
reflected
efforts
legislators
achieve
informed
bipartisan
consensus
contesting
sufficiency
evidence
evidence
justifying
bvap
floor
challengers
ask
much
state
officials
charged
sensitive
duty
reapportioning
legislative
districts
claim
bvap
floor
akin
mechanically
numerical
view
rejected
alabama
supra
record
supports
state
conclusion
instance
bvap
necessary
black
voters
functional
working
majority
pp
supp
affirmed
part
vacated
part
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
roberts
ginsburg
breyer
sotomayor
kagan
joined
alito
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
golden
et
appellants
virginia
state
board
elections
et
al
appeal
district
eastern
district
virginia
march
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
case
addresses
whether
virginia
state
legislature
consideration
race
drawing
new
lines
state
legislative
districts
violated
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
census
redistricting
required
ensure
proper
numerical
apportionment
virginia
house
delegates
undisputed
boundary
lines
districts
issue
drawn
goal
ensuring
district
black
population
bvap
least
certain
voters
challenged
new
districts
unconstitutional
racial
gerrymanders
district
eastern
district
virginia
constituted
district
rejected
challenges
districts
districts
district
concluded
voters
shown
precedent
requires
race
predominant
factor
motivating
legislature
decision
place
significant
number
voters
within
without
particular
district
miller
johnson
district
held
race
predominates
conflict
traditional
redistricting
criteria
race
supp
ed
confined
predominance
analysis
portions
new
lines
appeared
deviate
traditional
criteria
found
violation
remaining
district
district
district
found
race
predominate
concluded
however
lines
constitutional
legislature
use
race
narrowly
tailored
compelling
state
interest
particular
district
determined
legislature
good
reasons
believe
racial
target
necessary
district
avoid
diminishing
ability
black
voters
elect
preferred
candidates
time
violated
voting
rights
act
alabama
legislative
black
caucus
alabama
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
emphasis
deleted
appeal
challengers
contend
district
employed
incorrect
legal
standard
racial
predominance
legislature
lacked
good
reasons
use
race
district
affirms
district
vacates
remands
remaining
districts
census
virginia
general
assembly
set
redraw
legislative
districts
state
senate
house
delegates
time
elections
february
house
committee
privileges
elections
adopted
resolution
establishing
criteria
guide
redistricting
process
among
criteria
traditional
redistricting
factors
compactness
contiguity
territory
respect
communities
interest
traditional
objectives
committee
gave
priority
two
goals
first
accordance
principle
one
person
one
vote
committee
resolved
population
district
shall
nearly
equal
population
every
district
practicable
deviations
falling
within
one
percent
supp
second
committee
resolved
new
map
must
comply
protections
unwarranted
retrogression
contained
voting
rights
act
ibid
time
required
covered
jurisdictions
including
virginia
preclear
change
voting
standard
practice
procedure
showing
federal
authorities
change
purpose
effect
diminishing
ability
members
minority
group
elect
preferred
candidates
choice
stat
redistricting
process
completed
held
coverage
formula
voting
rights
act
longer
may
used
require
preclearance
see
shelby
county
holder
slip
committee
criteria
presented
potential
problems
house
districts
congress
amended
plan
leads
impermissible
retrogression
compared
plan
currently
effect
typically
called
plan
new
plan
diminishes
number
districts
minority
groups
preferred
candidates
choice
often
called
districts
harris
arizona
independent
redistricting
slip
quoting
parties
agree
districts
issue
minorities
constituted
majority
population
many
past
elections
qualified
districts
districts
underpopulated
however
new
plan
required
moving
significant
numbers
new
voters
districts
order
comply
principle
one
person
one
vote
benchmark
plan
districts
bvaps
ranging
three
districts
bvaps
seeking
maintain
minority
voters
ability
elect
preferred
candidates
districts
complying
criterion
legislators
concluded
districts
needed
contain
bvap
least
supp
trial
parties
disputed
whether
figure
aspiration
target
rule
ibid
dispute
important
question
whether
figure
used
drawing
challenged
districts
ibid
parties
agreed
district
found
bvap
figure
used
structuring
districts
ibid
enacted
plan
districts
contained
bvap
greater
first
suggested
bvap
criterion
legislators
agreed
upon
less
clear
evidence
see
describing
estimony
question
muddle
end
district
found
criterion
emerged
discussions
among
certain
members
house
black
caucus
leader
redistricting
effort
house
delegate
chris
jones
based
largely
concerns
pertaining
delegate
tyler
district
figure
applied
across
board
twelve
districts
ibid
april
general
assembly
passed
delegate
jones
plan
broad
support
parties
members
black
caucus
one
two
dissenting
members
black
caucus
delegate
tyler
district
objected
solely
ground
bvap
district
low
june
department
justice
precleared
plan
three
years
later
suit
filed
separate
district
struck
virginia
third
federal
congressional
district
issue
based
part
legislature
use
bvap
threshold
see
page
virginia
state
bd
elections
supp
ed
vacated
remanded
sub
nom
cantor
personhuballah
judgt
entered
sub
nom
page
virginia
state
bd
elections
wl
june
appeal
dism
sub
nom
wittman
personhuballah
decision
voters
registered
districts
issue
filed
action
challenging
district
lines
equal
protection
clause
claims
challeng
ed
constitutionality
apportionment
statewide
legislative
body
case
heard
district
virginia
house
delegates
speaker
william
howell
together
referred
hereinafter
state
intervened
assumed
responsibility
defending
plan
district
bench
trial
divided
district
ruled
state
respect
challenged
district
first
assessed
whether
racial
considerations
predominated
traditional
redistricting
criteria
supp
essential
premise
majority
opinion
race
predominate
unless
actual
conflict
traditional
redistricting
criteria
race
leads
subordination
former
implement
standard
moreover
limited
inquiry
racial
motive
portions
district
lines
appeared
deviate
traditional
criteria
thus
examine
aspects
district
appear
ed
constitute
neutral
criteria
ascertain
whether
deviations
attributable
race
considerations
protection
incumbents
found
deviation
attributable
race
proceed
determine
whether
racial
considerations
qualitatively
subordinated
districting
criteria
ibid
analysis
found
race
predominate
districts
turned
district
district
found
race
predominate
reasoned
chieving
bvap
floor
required
maneuvering
reflected
face
district
applying
strict
scrutiny
held
compliance
compelling
state
interest
legislature
consideration
race
district
narrowly
tailored
narrow
tailoring
explained
state
strong
basis
evidence
believe
actions
reasonably
necessary
avoid
retrogression
particular
found
delegate
jones
considered
precisely
kinds
evidence
legislators
encouraged
use
achieving
compliance
including
turnout
rates
district
large
disenfranchised
prison
population
voting
patterns
contested
primary
general
elections
judge
keenan
dissented
districts
concluded
majority
applied
incorrect
understanding
racial
predominance
delegate
jones
analysis
district
general
conclusory
appeal
followed
probable
jurisdiction
noted
see
ii
factual
procedural
background
set
appropriate
consider
controlling
legal
principles
case
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
state
without
sufficient
justification
separat
ing
citizens
different
voting
districts
basis
race
miller
harms
flow
racial
sorting
include
personally
subjected
racial
classification
well
represented
legislator
believes
primary
obligation
represent
members
particular
racial
group
alabama
slip
alterations
citation
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
time
courts
must
exercise
extraordinary
caution
adjudicating
claims
state
drawn
district
lines
basis
race
miller
electoral
districting
difficult
subject
legislatures
requiring
delicate
balancing
competing
considerations
redistricting
differs
kinds
state
decisionmaking
legislature
always
aware
race
draws
district
lines
aware
variety
demographic
factors
shaw
reno
shaw
light
considerations
held
plaintiff
alleging
racial
gerrymandering
bears
burden
show
either
circumstantial
evidence
district
shape
demographics
direct
evidence
going
legislative
purpose
race
predominant
factor
motivating
legislature
decision
place
significant
number
voters
within
without
particular
district
miller
satisfy
burden
plaintiff
must
prove
legislature
subordinated
traditional
districting
principles
racial
considerations
ibid
challengers
contend
finding
race
predominate
districts
district
misapplied
controlling
law
two
principal
ways
considers
turn
challengers
first
argue
district
misunderstood
relevant
precedents
required
challengers
establish
prerequisite
showing
racial
predominance
actual
conflict
enacted
plan
traditional
redistricting
principles
agrees
challengers
point
threshold
requirement
enacted
plan
must
conflict
traditional
principles
might
reconcilable
case
law
earlier
time
shaw
recognized
claim
racial
gerrymandering
first
time
see
certain
language
shaw
read
support
requiring
challenger
alleges
racial
gerrymandering
show
actual
conflict
traditional
principles
opinion
stated
example
strict
scrutiny
applies
redistricting
legislation
bizarre
face
unexplainable
grounds
race
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
opinion
also
stated
reapportionment
one
area
appearances
matter
opinion
miller
however
clarified
racial
predominance
inquiry
particular
rejected
argument
regardless
legislature
purposes
plaintiff
must
demonstrate
district
shape
bizarre
unexplainable
basis
race
held
contrary
language
central
instant
case
shape
relevant
bizarreness
necessary
element
constitutional
wrong
threshold
requirement
proof
may
persuasive
circumstantial
evidence
race
sake
districting
principles
legislature
dominant
controlling
rationale
parties
therefore
may
rely
evidence
bizarreness
establish
districting
may
show
predominance
either
circumstantial
evidence
district
shape
demographics
direct
evidence
going
legislative
purpose
addressed
racial
gerrymandering
traditional
redistricting
factors
shaw
hunt
shaw
ii
rejected
view
one
dissents
strict
scrutiny
apply
state
traditional
districting
principles
quoting
stevens
dissenting
alteration
omitted
race
may
predominate
even
reapportionment
plan
respects
traditional
principles
explained
ace
criterion
state
view
compromised
considerations
came
play
decision
made
state
theory
case
irreconcilable
miller
shaw
ii
state
insists
example
harm
racial
gerrymandering
lies
racial
per
se
grouping
voters
race
together
otherwise
lack
shared
interests
constitutional
violation
racial
gerrymandering
cases
stems
racial
purpose
state
action
stark
manifestation
miller
supra
equal
protection
clause
prohibit
misshapen
districts
prohibits
unjustified
racial
classifications
state
contends
race
prohibited
effect
district
lines
legislature
drawn
lines
accordance
traditional
criteria
argument
parallels
district
reasoning
reapportionment
plan
express
racial
classification
unless
racial
purpose
apparent
face
plan
based
irregular
nature
lines
see
supp
incorrect
racial
predominance
inquiry
concerns
actual
considerations
provided
essential
basis
lines
drawn
post
hoc
justifications
legislature
theory
used
reality
traditional
redistricting
principles
moreover
numerous
malleable
district
identified
fewer
redistricting
factors
legislature
consider
surprisingly
ethereal
admi
degrees
deploying
factors
various
combinations
permutations
state
construct
plethora
potential
maps
look
consistent
traditional
principles
race
sake
overriding
reason
choosing
one
map
others
race
still
may
predominate
reasons
conflict
inconsistency
enacted
plan
traditional
redistricting
criteria
threshold
requirement
mandatory
precondition
order
challenger
establish
claim
racial
gerrymandering
course
conflict
inconsistency
may
persuasive
circumstantial
evidence
tending
show
racial
predomination
rule
requiring
challengers
present
kind
evidence
every
case
practical
matter
many
cases
perhaps
cases
challengers
unable
prove
unconstitutional
racial
gerrymander
without
evidence
enacted
plan
conflicts
traditional
redistricting
criteria
general
legislatures
engage
impermissible
redistricting
find
necessary
depart
traditional
principles
order
absence
conflict
traditional
principles
may
difficult
challengers
find
evidence
sufficient
show
race
overriding
factor
causing
neutral
considerations
cast
aside
fact
date
affirmed
predominance
finding
remanded
case
determination
predominance
without
evidence
district
lines
deviated
traditional
principles
see
alabama
slip
hunt
cromartie
bush
vera
plurality
opinion
shaw
ii
supra
miller
supra
shaw
supra
yet
law
responds
proper
evidence
valid
inferences
circumstances
learns
ways
commands
circumvented
may
cases
challengers
able
establish
racial
predominance
absence
actual
conflict
presenting
direct
evidence
legislative
purpose
intent
compelling
circumstantial
evidence
challengers
submit
district
erred
considered
legislature
racial
motive
extent
challengers
identified
deviations
traditional
redistricting
criteria
attributable
race
factor
challengers
view
approach
foreclosed
holistic
analysis
district
led
district
give
insufficient
weight
bvap
target
relevant
evidence
race
predominated
agrees
explained
showing
deviation
conflict
traditional
redistricting
principles
necessary
prerequisite
establishing
racial
predominance
supra
even
challenger
alleges
conflict
succeeds
showing
one
confine
analysis
conflicting
portions
lines
basic
unit
analysis
racial
gerrymandering
claims
general
racial
predominance
inquiry
particular
district
racial
gerrymandering
claims
proceed
alabama
slip
consistently
described
claim
racial
gerrymandering
claim
race
improperly
used
drawing
boundaries
one
specific
electoral
districts
ibid
miller
basic
predominance
test
scrutinizes
legislature
motivation
placing
significant
number
voters
within
without
particular
district
courts
evaluating
racial
predominance
therefore
divorce
portion
lines
whatever
relationship
traditional
principles
rest
district
suggest
courts
evaluating
racial
gerrymandering
claims
may
consider
evidence
pertaining
area
larger
smaller
district
issue
recognized
oters
course
present
statewide
evidence
order
prove
racial
gerrymandering
particular
district
alabama
supra
slip
emphasis
deleted
districts
share
borders
legislature
may
pursue
common
redistricting
policy
toward
multiple
districts
likewise
legislature
decisionmaking
may
evident
notable
way
particular
part
district
follows
may
consider
evidence
regarding
certain
portions
district
lines
including
portions
conflict
traditional
redistricting
principles
ultimate
object
inquiry
however
legislature
predominant
motive
design
district
whole
faced
racial
gerrymandering
claim
therefore
must
consider
lines
district
issue
explanation
particular
portion
lines
moreover
must
take
account
districtwide
context
concentrating
particular
portions
isolation
may
obscure
significance
relevant
districtwide
evidence
stark
splits
racial
composition
populations
moved
disparate
parts
district
use
express
racial
target
holistic
analysis
necessary
give
kind
evidence
proper
weight
challengers
ask
correct
district
racial
predominance
standard
also
apply
standard
conclude
race
fact
predominate
districts
district
held
part
state
asks
hold
even
race
predominate
districts
state
predominant
use
race
narrowly
tailored
compelling
interest
complying
declines
requests
urs
final
review
first
view
department
transportation
association
american
railroads
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
district
best
positioned
determine
first
instance
extent
proper
standard
race
directed
shape
districts
race
predominate
proper
district
determine
first
instance
whether
strict
scrutiny
satisfied
matters
left
district
remand
iii
turns
arguments
regarding
district
challenger
succeeds
establishing
racial
predominance
burden
shifts
state
demonstrate
districting
legislation
narrowly
tailored
achieve
compelling
interest
miller
supra
district
determined
state
predominant
use
race
district
narrowly
tailored
achieve
compliance
challengers
contest
finding
narrow
tailoring
dispute
compliance
compelling
interest
relevant
time
previous
cases
therefore
assumes
without
deciding
state
interest
complying
voting
rights
act
compelling
alabama
supra
slip
shaw
ii
turning
narrow
tailoring
explained
contours
requirement
alabama
state
justifies
predominant
use
race
redistricting
basis
need
comply
voting
rights
act
narrow
tailoring
requirement
insists
legislature
strong
basis
evidence
support
choice
made
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
standard
require
state
show
action
actually
necessary
avoid
statutory
violation
use
race
state
lost
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
rather
requisite
strong
basis
evidence
exists
legislature
good
reasons
believe
must
use
race
order
satisfy
voting
rights
act
even
find
actions
necessary
statutory
compliance
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
finds
error
district
conclusion
state
sufficient
grounds
determine
calculus
employed
district
necessary
avoid
violating
explained
time
barred
virginia
adopting
districting
change
effect
diminishing
ability
members
minority
group
elect
preferred
candidates
choice
determining
minority
population
percentage
satisfy
standard
difficult
task
requiring
view
department
justice
functional
analysis
electoral
behavior
within
particular
election
district
guidance
concerning
redistricting
section
voting
rights
act
fed
reg
facts
found
district
legislature
performed
kind
functional
analysis
district
deciding
upon
bvap
target
redrawing
district
presented
difficult
task
result
reflected
efforts
delegate
jones
colleagues
achieve
informed
bipartisan
consensus
delegate
jones
met
delegate
tyler
probably
half
dozen
times
configure
district
order
avoid
retrogression
supp
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
discussed
district
incumbents
districts
also
considered
turnout
rates
results
recent
contested
primary
general
elections
district
large
population
disenfranchised
black
prisoners
challengers
moreover
dispute
district
district
white
black
voters
area
tend
vote
blocs
see
light
delegate
jones
careful
assessment
local
conditions
structures
state
strong
basis
evidence
believe
bvap
floor
required
avoid
retrogression
challengers
responses
ask
much
state
officials
charged
sensitive
duty
reapportioning
legislative
districts
first
challengers
contest
sufficiency
evidence
showing
delegate
jones
fact
performed
functional
analysis
part
analysis
memorialized
writing
district
factual
findings
reviewed
clear
error
see
easley
cromartie
findings
regarding
legislature
arrived
bvap
target
well
supported
require
engaged
redistricting
compile
comprehensive
administrative
record
vera
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
challengers
argue
drafters
plan
insufficient
evidence
justify
bvap
floor
elections
idiosyncratic
challengers
contend
moreover
demographic
information
prison
district
absent
record
delegate
tyler
perspective
influenced
personal
interest
reelection
may
reasons
possible
state
drawn
district
bvap
sought
judicial
preclearance
found
violation
question
law
insist
state
legislature
redistricting
determine
precisely
percent
minority
population
demands
alabama
slip
question
whether
state
good
reasons
believe
bvap
floor
necessary
avoid
liability
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
state
good
reasons
circumstances
holding
otherwise
afford
state
legislatures
little
breathing
room
leaving
trapped
competing
hazards
liability
voting
rights
act
equal
protection
clause
vera
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
final
point
challengers
liken
bvap
floor
mechanically
numerical
view
rejected
alabama
slip
alabama
condemn
use
bvap
targets
comply
every
instance
rather
corrected
misperception
required
state
maintai
population
percentages
districts
prior
plan
slip
seem
highly
unlikely
explained
reducing
district
bvap
say
significant
impact
black
voters
ability
elect
preferred
candidate
slip
yet
reducing
bvap
well
might
effect
cases
record
supports
legislature
conclusion
one
instance
bvap
necessary
black
voters
functional
working
majority
iv
holding
case
controlled
precedent
reaffirms
basic
racial
predominance
analysis
explained
miller
shaw
ii
basic
narrow
tailoring
analysis
explained
alabama
district
judgment
district
consistent
principles
applying
principles
remaining
districts
entrusted
district
first
instance
judgment
district
affirmed
part
vacated
part
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
opinion
alito
golden
et
appellants
virginia
state
board
elections
et
al
appeal
district
eastern
district
virginia
march
justice
alito
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
join
opinion
insofar
upholds
constitutionality
district
ante
districting
plan
issue
adopted
prior
decision
shelby
county
holder
therefore
appropriate
apply
body
law
effect
time
appellants
never
contested
district
holding
compliance
voting
rights
act
compelling
government
interest
covered
jurisdictions
decision
shelby
county
see
supp
ed
concur
judgment
insofar
vacates
remands
judgment
respect
remaining
districts
unlike
however
hold
districts
must
satisfy
strict
scrutiny
see
post
thomas
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
see
also
league
latin
american
citizens
perry
scalia
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
hen
legislature
intentionally
creates
district
race
necessarily
predominant
motivation
strict
scrutiny
therefore
triggered
opinion
thomas
golden
et
appellants
virginia
state
board
elections
et
al
appeal
district
eastern
district
virginia
march
justice
thomas
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
appellants
contend
virginia
state
legislative
districts
unconstitutional
racial
gerrymanders
district
rejected
challenge
holding
race
legislature
predominant
motive
drawing
districts
remaining
district
survives
strict
scrutiny
reverse
district
districts
therefore
concur
judgment
part
dissent
part
concur
judgment
reversing
district
decision
uphold
districts
issue
case
house
districts
agree
however
decision
leave
open
question
whether
race
predominated
districts
thus
whether
subject
strict
scrutiny
ante
appellees
hereinafter
state
concede
legislature
intentionally
drew
districts
districts
see
brief
appellees
legislature
sought
achieve
black
population
least
adjusting
lines
districts
concession
view
mandates
strict
scrutiny
district
see
bush
vera
thomas
concurring
judgment
state
concession
intentionally
created
districts
sufficient
show
race
predominant
motivating
factor
redistricting
league
latin
american
citizens
perry
lulac
scalia
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
hen
legislature
intentionally
creates
district
race
necessarily
predominant
motivation
strict
scrutiny
therefore
triggered
therefore
hold
district
must
apply
strict
scrutiny
districts
remand
ii
disagree
judgment
respect
remaining
district
district
majority
affirms
district
holding
district
subject
strict
scrutiny
agree
districts
state
conceded
intentionally
drew
district
district
disagree
however
majority
determination
district
satisfies
strict
scrutiny
held
state
may
draw
distinctions
among
citizens
based
race
pursuing
compelling
state
interest
chosen
narrowly
tailored
means
accomplish
interest
shaw
hunt
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
state
asserts
used
race
drawing
district
compelling
interest
complying
section
voting
rights
act
brief
appellees
argues
based
functional
analysis
district
narrowly
tailored
use
race
achieve
interest
view
state
neither
asserted
compelling
state
interest
narrowly
tailored
use
race
initial
matter
majority
errs
assum
ing
without
deciding
state
interest
complying
voting
rights
act
compelling
ante
sure
previously
assumed
state
compelling
interest
complying
voting
rights
act
done
cases
upheld
redistricting
plan
issue
see
miller
johnson
leaving
open
question
hether
cases
compliance
voting
rights
act
standing
alone
provide
compelling
interest
independent
interest
remedying
past
discrimination
never
today
assumed
compelling
state
interest
upholding
state
redistricting
plan
indeed
know
case
context
assumed
away
part
state
burden
justify
intentional
use
race
first
hold
complying
voting
rights
act
compelling
interest
ompliance
federal
antidiscrimination
laws
justify
districting
challenged
district
reasonably
necessary
constitutional
reading
application
laws
emphasis
added
decade
ago
joined
justice
scalia
opinion
lulac
noted
upheld
constitutionality
proper
exercise
congress
authority
fifteenth
amendment
enforce
amendment
prohibition
denial
abridgment
right
vote
therefore
agreed
proper
case
covered
jurisdiction
may
compelling
interest
complying
since
concluded
unconstitutional
northwest
austin
municipal
util
dist
one
holder
thomas
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
violence
intimidation
subterfuge
led
congress
pass
uphold
longer
remains
longer
justified
appropriate
mechanism
enforcement
fifteenth
amendment
view
unconstitutional
hold
state
compelling
interest
complying
even
compliance
compelling
interest
state
failed
narrowly
tailor
use
race
interest
explained
ny
preference
based
racial
ethnic
criteria
must
necessarily
receive
searching
examination
wygant
jackson
bd
plurality
opinion
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
accord
adarand
constructors
peña
grutter
bollinger
rehnquist
dissenting
exacting
scrutiny
makes
sense
iscrimination
basis
race
odious
aspects
rose
mitchell
accordingly
state
use
race
must
bear
exact
compelling
state
interest
wygant
supra
opinion
powell
context
redistricting
redistricting
map
must
minimum
actually
remedy
anticipated
violation
achieve
compliance
voting
rights
act
shaw
serious
doubts
standard
narrow
tailoring
characterized
today
alabama
legislative
black
caucus
alabama
relying
alabama
majority
explains
narrow
tailoring
redistricting
context
requires
legislature
strong
basis
evidence
support
choice
made
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
standard
demand
state
actions
actually
necessary
achieve
compelling
state
interest
order
constitutionally
valid
alabama
supra
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
ante
instead
standard
state
legislature
needs
good
reasons
believe
use
race
required
even
use
race
actually
necessary
alabama
supra
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
approach
narrow
tailoring
deferring
state
belief
good
reasons
use
race
strict
name
extent
applies
alabama
dilute
standard
established
precedents
demur
applying
proper
standard
state
classifications
based
race
conclude
state
narrowly
tailor
use
race
comply
majority
recognizes
requires
state
redistricting
plan
maintain
black
population
ability
elect
candidate
choice
district
issue
words
state
must
avoid
retrogression
new
district
ante
majority
observes
redistricting
plan
architect
delegate
chris
jones
performed
functional
analysis
deciding
district
required
black
population
opposed
percentage
avoid
retrogression
ibid
notes
arriving
threshold
delegate
jones
considered
turnout
rates
results
primary
general
elections
district
large
population
disenfranchised
black
prisoners
ante
also
met
incumbent
delegate
district
probably
half
dozen
times
discussed
district
incumbents
districts
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
efforts
add
majority
view
careful
assessment
local
conditions
structures
ante
agree
efforts
satisfy
narrow
tailoring
delegate
jones
admitted
aware
retrogress
ion
analysis
performed
im
persons
worked
development
redistricting
plan
app
instead
merely
look
ed
percentage
black
population
percentage
black
voting
age
population
looked
happened
last
year
period
given
existing
population
demographic
shifts
tried
restore
back
levels
black
population
previous
maps
approach
misguided
require
maintaining
population
percentages
districts
prior
plan
alabama
supra
slip
event
calculation
qualify
rigorous
analysis
think
permit
imprecise
approach
regard
instance
racial
discrimination
evidence
cited
majority
similarly
weak
majority
points
meetings
delegate
jones
incumbent
delegate
district
ante
apparent
record
whether
district
incumbent
current
black
population
candidate
choice
moreover
incumbent
delegate
may
well
wanted
district
electorally
safer
voting
rights
act
requires
also
obvious
delegate
jones
seeking
avoid
retrogression
district
met
incumbent
delegates
districts
ibid
view
efforts
fall
far
short
establishing
black
population
bears
state
interest
alternative
percentage
wygant
supra
opinion
powell
accordingly
hold
state
failed
narrowly
tailor
use
race
avoid
retrogression
district
reaching
conclusions
recognize
least
responsible
state
legislature
racially
gerrymandered
districts
explained
repeatedly
failed
decide
whether
compliance
voting
rights
act
compelling
governmental
interest
see
supra
indeed
refused
even
decide
whether
constitutional
despite
twice
taken
cases
decide
question
compare
juris
statement
northwest
austin
presenting
question
hether
preclearance
requirement
applied
valid
exercise
congress
remedial
powers
reconstruction
amendments
shelby
county
holder
granting
certiorari
question
hether
congress
decision
reauthorize
section
voting
rights
act
coverage
formula
section
violated
tenth
amendment
article
iv
constitution
northwest
austin
holding
district
issue
eligible
seek
bailout
voting
rights
act
therefore
reach
ing
constitutionality
shelby
county
holder
slip
holding
coverage
formula
unconstitutional
issu
ing
holding
result
left
state
without
clear
guidance
redistricting
obligations
put
state
similar
bind
respect
narrow
tailoring
comply
state
necessarily
must
make
deliberate
precise
effort
sort
citizens
basis
race
result
fundamentally
odds
constitution
neither
knows
tolerates
classes
among
citizens
plessy
ferguson
harlan
dissenting
contradiction
illustrates
perversity
jurisprudence
area
well
uncomfortable
position
state
might
find
despite
sympathy
state
ignore
constitution
clear
prohibition
race
discrimination
constitution
abhors
classifications
based
race
classifications
harm
favored
races
based
illegitimate
motives
also
every
time
government
places
citizens
racial
registers
demeans
us
grutter
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
prohibition
urchased
price
immeasurable
human
suffering
reflects
nation
understanding
classifications
ultimately
destructive
impact
individual
society
adarand
constructors
thomas
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
respectfully
dissent
judgment
district
footnotes
unclear
record
whether
state
sought
justify
use
race
grounds
leave
district
evaluate
first
instance
asserted
compelling
interest
including
whether
interest
forfeited
see
also
shaw
hunt
miller
expressly
left
open
question
whether
proper
circumstances
compliance
voting
rights
act
compelling
state
interest
reach
question
find
creating
additional
district
required
correct
reading
assume
arguendo
purpose
resolving
suit
compliance
compelling
interest
hold
remedy
narrowly
tailored
asserted
end
bush
vera
plurality
opinion
assume
without
deciding
compliance
voting
rights
act
interpreted
precedents
compelling
state
interest
hold
districts
issue
narrowly
tailored
achieve
interest
citation
omitted
alabama
legislative
black
caucus
alabama
slip
decide
whether
continued
compliance
remains
compelling
interest
conclude
district
legislature
asked
wrong
question
respect
narrow
tailoring