less than 1 minute read

Karcher v. Daggett

Significance, No Rationale For Deviation Found, Feldman Plan Found Flawed, Minority Opinion, Impact


Alan Karcher, Speaker, New Jersey Assembly


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


Washington, D.C

Date of Decision

22 June 1983


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

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988