Karcher v. Daggett - Significance, No Rationale For Deviation Found, Feldman Plan Found Flawed, Minority Opinion, Impact

court decision appellant jersey

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

Karcher v. Daggett - Further Readings

Karcher v. Daggett - Significance

In striking down a reapportionment plan enacted into law by the state of New Jersey, the U.S. Supreme Court expressed their support of apportionment of voters into voting districts by a standard that required districts that were "as nearly as practicable" close to numerical equality. That standard, as in previous rulings, deliberately did not set absolute numerical standards which states could use…

Karcher v. Daggett - No Rationale For Deviation Found

In rendering a decision on appeal, the majority Supreme Court justices sought to affirm the standard set in Kirkpatrick v. Preisler (1969) and White v. Weiser (1973). In Kirkpatrick, the Court refused to set a fixed figure regarding population deviation of reapportioned districts (ostensibly to take into account considerations such factors as maintaining voting demographics, geography, and to prot…

Karcher v. Daggett - Feldman Plan Found Flawed

The justices felt appellants failed to consider a possible error in the 1980 census and appropriately compensate for a possible undercount of voters in the state. Citing expert evidence of a Princeton University demographer that was presented by appellees (as well as several published studies regarding undercounts in the 1950, 1960, and 1970 censuses), the Court found the Feldman Plan flawed. As s…

Karcher v. Daggett - Minority Opinion

Justice White delivered the dissenting opinion. The minority justices held fast to the belief that any legislative apportionment should promote and provide fair, nondiscriminatory voting districts for all citizens which was the intent of the Feldman Plan. The dispute at issue then, according to the minority justices, was the maximum standard population deviation among voting districts in the state…

Karcher v. Daggett - Impact

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Feldman plan even though the population difference per district was rather small (less than .7 percent). The justices held consistent to previous rulings in Kirkpatrick v. Preisler (1969) and White v. Weiser (1973) by adhering to a standard which gave no exact, numerical guidance regarding the maximum allowable standard deviation between voting districts. How…

Citing this material

Please include a link to this page if you have found this material useful for research or writing a related article. Content on this website is from high-quality, licensed material originally published in print form. You can always be sure you're reading unbiased, factual, and accurate information.

Highlight the text below, right-click, and select “copy”. Paste the link into your website, email, or any other HTML document.

<a href="http://law.jrank.org/pages/13414/Karcher-v-Daggett.html">Karcher v. Daggett - Significance, No Rationale For Deviation Found, Feldman Plan Found Flawed, Minority Opinion, Impact</a>