Shaw v. Hunt - Case Background, Question Of Racial Gerrymandering Or Minority Voter Representation, A Different Opinion, Impact

court petitioner decision james

Petitioner

Ruth O. Shaw, et al.; James Arthur Pope, et al.

Respondent

James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor of North Carolina, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

That the state of North Carolina created an unconstitutional racially gerrymandered district, which may violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Robinson O. Everett (Shaw), Thomas A. Farr (Pope)

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Edwin M. Speas, Jr.

Justices for the Court

Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas

Justices Dissenting

Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

13 June 1996

Decision

The district court decision was reversed.

Significance

The case of Shaw v. Hunt raised many important issues regarding to what extent it is permissible for a state to use racial classifications as the primary consideration when drawing majority-minority voter districts. The ramifications of the Voting Rights Act, Sections 2 and 5, and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause were carefully considered with respect to the alleged racial gerrymandering discussed in this case.

Additional Topics

Shaw v. Hunt - Case Background

In the fall of 1991, the North Carolina state legislature proposed a redistricting plan which contained only one black majority district. The plan was rejected, and a revised plan with a second majority minority district was then pre-cleared by the attorney general. Five residents of North Carolina filed suit in district court. They claimed that, "The revised plan created a racial gerrymander in v…

Shaw v. Hunt - Question Of Racial Gerrymandering Or Minority Voter Representation

The case of Shaw v. Hunt boiled down to the difficult question of how a state may make sure that voter districts represent minority populations without infringing on the rights of the rest of the voters. Redistricting plans should draw districts to follow principles of compactness, contiguousness, and community of interest. The plan in this case, as argued by Robinson O. Everett for Shaw, seemed t…

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.