Shaw v. Reno
Case Background, When Has A State Gone Too Far?, Dissension, Impact, Related Cases
Ruth O. Shaw, et al.
Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, et al.
That the state of North Carolina created an unconstitutional racially gerrymandered district, which violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Robinson O. Everett
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
H. Jefferson Powell
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas
Harry A. Blackmun, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
28 June 1993
The district court's decision was reversed and remanded.
The U.S. Supreme Court considered the many complex and difficult issues involved when the state of North Carolina proposed the creation of a second majority-minority district no wider than a two-lane highway, raising the possibility that this action violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
- Simon Schuster v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims Board - Significance, Crime For Profit
- Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois - Significance, State Workers Challenge The System, Another Blow To Patronage
- Shaw v. Reno - Case Background
- Shaw v. Reno - Further Readings
- Shaw v. Reno - When Has A State Gone Too Far?
- Shaw v. Reno - Dissension
- Shaw v. Reno - Impact
- Shaw v. Reno - Related Cases
- Other Free Encyclopedias