less than 1 minute read

Davis v. Bandemer

Significance, A Political Question?, An Agreeable Test, Inconsistent Results, Impact, Further Readings

Petitioner

Susan J. Davis, et al.

Respondent

Irwin C. Bandemer, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

That Indiana's 1981 legislative redistricting plan did not unconstitutionally discriminate against Democratic legislators in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

William M. Evans

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Theodore R. Boehm

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, Byron R. White (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist

Justices Dissenting

Lewis F. Powell, Jr., John Paul Stevens

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

30 June 1986

Decision

Upheld the state of Indiana's legislative redistricting plan, concluding that although the defendant's claim that the plan violated the Equal Protection Clause could be decided by the Court, the plan itself did not discriminate against Democratic legislators.

Related Cases

  • Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849).
  • Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960).
  • Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962).
  • Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224 (1993).
  • Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993).
  • Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996).
  • Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1996).

Additional topics

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