Karcher v. Daggett
Significance, No Rationale For Deviation Found, Feldman Plan Found Flawed, Minority Opinion, Impact
Appellant
Alan Karcher, Speaker, New Jersey Assembly
Appellees
Daggett, et al.
Appellant's Claim
Gerrymandering by the controlling Democratic Party of the New Jersey legislature did not violate the U.S. Constitution because it relied on "good faith" criteria for legislative redistricting and protected minority voting rights.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Kenneth J. Guido, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Appellees
Bernard Hellring
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens
Justices Dissenting
Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White
Place
Washington, D.C
Date of Decision
22 June 1983
Decision
The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court which found the re-districting plan to be unfairly biased in favor of the outgoing political party (then controlling) the New Jersey Legislature.
Related Cases
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964).
- Wesberry v. Sanders, 378 U.S. 1 (1964).
- Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, 394 U.S. 526 (1969).
- Giffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735 (1973).
- White v. Weiser, 412 U.S. 783 (1973).
Additional topics
- Kolender v. Lawson - Significance, Impact
- Johnson v. Transportation Agency - Significance, Related Cases, Further Readings
- Karcher v. Daggett - Further Readings
- Karcher v. Daggett - Significance
- Karcher v. Daggett - No Rationale For Deviation Found
- Karcher v. Daggett - Feldman Plan Found Flawed
- Karcher v. Daggett - Minority Opinion
- Karcher v. Daggett - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988