Davis v. Bandemer - Significance, A Political Question?, An Agreeable Test, Inconsistent Results, Impact, Further Readings

Davis v. Bandemer - Significance

The ruling made clear that the Supreme Court can decide challenges to legislative redistricting plans which are alleged to discriminate against certain political groups, as opposed to racial, religious, or other similar groups. Thus, for the first time the Supreme Court held that political gerrymandering can violate the Constitution. However, the test adopted by a plurality of the Court makes such…

Davis v. Bandemer - Further Readings

Davis v. Bandemer - A Political Question?

The first question before the Supreme Court was whether the Court properly could resolve the issue of whether the Indiana redistricting plan constituted a political gerrymander in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Luther v. Borden (1849), the Supreme Court first adopted what is now known as the political question doctrine. Under this doctrine a federal court, including the Supreme Court, c…

Davis v. Bandemer - An Agreeable Test, Inconsistent Results

Having decided that the political gerrymandering issue was not a political question, the six justices in the majority on this point then considered whether the Indiana redistricting plan violated the Equal Protection Clause. Initially, all six justices agreed on the test to be used in analyzing political gerrymandering claims. In his opinion, Justice White found that political parties or other per…

Davis v. Bandemer - Impact

At first glance, the Court's decision in Davis appeared to be a victory for opponents of political gerrymandering; for the first time, the Supreme Court explicitly held that political gerrymandering can, in certain circumstances, intrude on the equal protection rights of a disadvantaged political group. However, the practical effect has been much different. Although not adopted by a majority of th…