Document: 425 U.S. 130 96 S.Ct. 1357 47 L.Ed.2d 629 Peter H. BEER et al., Appellants,v.UNITED STATES al. No. 73-1869. Argued March 26, 1975. Reargued Nov. 12, Decided 30, 1976. Syllabus The 1954 New Orleans City Charter provides for a seven-member city council, with one member being elected from each of five councilmanic districts, and two by the voters at large. In 1961 as it was required to do after decennial census, redistricted based on 1960 census so that in district Negroes constituted majority population but only about half registered voters, other four districts white outnumbered Negroes. No Negro council 1970. After 1970 devised reapportionment plan, under which there would be majorities voter one. Section 5 Voting Rights Act 1965 prohibits State or political subdivision subject § 4 (as is) enforcing proposed change voting procedures unless has obtained declaratory judgment District Court Columbia such "does not have purpose will effect denying abridging right vote account race color" submitted Attorney General he objected it. plan had been General, sought Court. That court refused allow go into effect, holding rights, moreover plan's failure alter charter provision at-large seats itself effect. Held : 1. Since 5's language clearly applies changes procedures, since existed without 1954, those were review 5. consequently erred could rejected solely because did eliminate seats. P. 138-139. 2. A legislative enhances position racial minorities respect their effective exercise electoral franchise cannot violate new apportionment discriminates racially Constitution. plying this standard here where, contrast none clear no question constitute one, is predictable bloc perhaps council. therefore concluding color within meaning Pp. 139-142. 374 F.Supp. 363, vacated remanded. James R. Stoner, Washington, D. C., appellants. Lawrence G. Wallace, appellee United States. Stanley A. Halpin, Jr., Orleans, La., appellees Jackson others. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion 1 19651 Act2 "any qualification prerequisite voting, standard, practice, procedure different force November 1, 1964," constitutionality upheld South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 301, 86 803, 15 769, now well established applicable when adopts plan. Allen Board Elections, 393 544, 89 817, 22 1; Georgia States, 411 526, 93 1702, 36 472. 2 brought suit seeking declaring Orleans' color.3 entered dismissal, rights citizens. 363. appealed Court, claiming used an incorrect assessing suit. We noted probable jurisdiction appeal. 419 822, 95 37, 42 45. 3 * almost 600,000 people. Some 55% Of remaining 45% Is Negro. 65% are white, 35% Are Negro.4 adopted mayor-council form government. time municipal provided consist seven members, also requires adjustment boundaries single-member following reflect shifts among districts. 1961, figures. stretched edge Lake Pontchartrain north side Mississippi River city's south side. fifth wedge shaped encompassed downtown area. these population, voters. Council during decade receipt figures (Plan I) continued basic north-to-south pattern combined wedge-shaped, district. Under Plan I they make up any largest percentage single 45.2%. When pursuant 5, it, stating appeared "dilute black strength combining number larger districts." He expressed view "the lines (were not) drawn (were) compelling governmental need" "not numeric configurations considerations compactness regularity shape." 6 Even before I, authorities commenced work second II.5 followed general northto-south districting common I.6 It produced (52.6%) II posed same objections raised I. addition, predominantly neighborhoods located generally east west progression," pointed out use situation inevitably diluting maximum potential impact vote. Following rejection II, action States Columbia. 7 concluded color.7 calculated if elect councilmen proportion share able choose 2.42 councilmen, and, 3.15 councilmen.8 But that, elections mark along lines, probably councilman candidate This difference between mathematical predicted reality burden case bar least demonstrate nothing redistricting feasible." F.Supp., 393. "(t)he made sort demonstration; indeed, conceded trial neither nor its variations City's sole available alternative." Ibid9 8 As separate independent ground rejecting held establishing "abridging . color." put it: "(T) supported choice consideration satisfy interest, need improbability realization through These evaluations compel conclusion feature scheme selected large impermissibly minimizing citizens; further additional reason does pass muster." Id., 402. (Footnotes omitted.) 9 result 1970, (or appointed successors) remained office ever since. 10 appellants urge, reargument conceded, mistaken 1954. correct interpretation statute regard. 11 procedures. "(D)iscriminatory practices instituted prior 1964 requirement preclearance (under 5)." Commission Civil Rights, Act: Ten Years After, p. 347. ordinance reference Indeed, charter, altered them; approval seats, having proceeding 5.10 B 12 principal argument makeup geographic color. evaluating claim important note outset constitutional law, statutory construction.11 determination color," must depend, therefore, upon intent Congress enacting specifically 13 history reveals "to rid country discrimination voting." U.S., 315, S.Ct., 812. intended play role achieving goal: 14 "Section response practice some jurisdictions staying step ahead federal courts passing discriminatory laws soon old ones struck down. possible law until Department private plaintiffs sustain proving too, discriminatory. decided, Supreme could, 'to shift advantage inertia perpetrators evil victim,' 'freezing election covered areas can shown nondiscriminatory.' " H.R.Rep.No.94-196, pp. 57-58. See H.R.Rep.No.439, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., 9-11, 26; S.Rep.No.162, pt. 3, 6-9, 24; H.R.Rep.No.91-397, 6-8, U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 3277; 8-11, 57-60; S.Rep.No.94-295, 15-19, 1975, 781; supra, 335, L.Ed.2d, 790. 16 By prohibiting enforcement voting-procedure demonstrated three-judge desired prevent "undo(ing) defeat(ing) recently won" 8, 3284. insure (the gains thus far achieved minority participation) shall destroyed (discriminatory) techniques." 19, 785. 17 7-year extension explicitly stated 5) fully satisfied determining basis facts found Court) true whether ability groups participate process choices Augmented, diminished, affected affecting ." 60 (emphasis added).12 words always lead retrogression franchise. 18 apparent hardly "effect" conclude, ameliorative 19 application present straightforward. while system contrast, them. Thus, every predict, Court's hypothesis may II.13 error conclude "will Act.14 20 Accordingly, vacated, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. 21 ordered. Judgment set aside 23 STEVENS took part decision case. 24 WHITE, dissenting. 25 With MARSHALL, agree reaches more burdensome complaining than pre-existing understand validity Any procedural otherwise reach section determined legislation 26 applied light findings, evidence questioned findings nominating "anti-single-shot" rules win his minority. my view, where exist, segregated residential pattern, unless, extent practicable, afford opportunity achieve representation roughly proportional community. Here, constituting approximately entitled construe electing three issue here. 27 Bloc unfortunate phenomenon, we repeatedly faced knowledgeable fact life. Where exists, most often see power minimize effects particularly occurs context operating muffle am aimed end, others, should construed applied. Richmond 422 358, 370-372, 2296, 2303-2305, 45 245, 255-257 (1975). 28 Minimizing exclusionary whites blacks scattered evenly throughout city; great extent, concentrated identifiable Orleans. like race, too life, known responsible drawing lines. lawmakers quite aware create majority; comes unavoidable composition intervenes control necessary fair body question. 29 Applying way times require race; deliberate polls relevant customs effectively foreclosed enjoying modicum body. 30 falls short satisfying MARSHALL failed sufficiently substantial justifications proposal, respectfully dissent affirm 31 whom BRENNAN joins, 32 Over past years has, again again, read 1965, 79 Stat. 439, amended, 402, 404, U.S.C. 1973c (1970 ed., Supp. V), expansively give broadest scope" state enactment even minor way." 566, 567, 832, (1969). 472 (1973); Perkins Matthews, 400 379, 91 431, 476 (1971); 769 (1966). While settled contours jurisdiction, however, yet devote much attention defining substantive bounds. today first Essentially, answer question: "abridging" color? 33 never answers Instead, produces convoluted construction transforms suggested questions, then precious little guidance answering 34 reading abridgment "lead minorities," Ante, 141, comparison existing demands preliminary inquiry simply wrong; finds support disserves purposes behind 35 Implicitly admitting much, adds another question, asked "retrogressive": Constitution." 141. addition theory, salvage test, our decisions proper test essentially inquiry. Still, accept awkward construction. Not multiple-step unduly cumbersome unnecessary place Columbia, dilutes unconstitutionality point congressional longer served sacred guarantees Fourteenth Fifteenth Amendments emerge badly battered. And process, approves blatantly dissent. 37 Amendment provides: 38 "The citizens denied abridged color, previous condition servitude." Const., Amdt. 15, 39 Although self-enforcing, litigation secure proved consuming ineffective, who resisted command strong unwavering. Finally decided intervene. enacted Act, designed 812, 779. 308-315, 808-812, 775-779. proclaims enforce fifteenth amendment Constitution ," 437; heart mechanism tracks Amendment, declares 1964, 40 V).1 41 somewhat broader regard proof shifted discriminatee discriminator2 undoubtedly tied standards Constitution.3 questionable "purpose effect" states anything standard,4 "denying abridging" phrase directly adopt Amendment. justifying deals plain language, adopt, arguably expand,5 standard. held, suggested, "ameliorative" "retrogressive," fortiori attempts provide relying asserted preserve strength6 wholly unsuccessful. What superficial credibility musters ignoring 5.7 43 makes clear, assiduously ignores, preclude plans "perpetuate discrimination,"8 "circumventing 15th amendment" switching new, discriminatory, moment litigants appear verge declared unconstitutional,9 promptly end pressuring remove all vestiges enactments submitting them preclearance.10 None furthered "retrogressive." statement alone sufficient 44 All met, plainly contemplates: whether, absolute terms, show meets Because both purposes, provision. itself, rather plans, proceeding.11 Ultimately, admits adding "ameliorative," constitutional. admission, why bothers nature nothing, will, fear, prove time-consuming distraction business plan.12 Except step, final statute, face, duplicates own.13 Nonetheless, still approach. properly returning proceeding, inexplicably tosses off footnote, undertakes analysis cases demanded.14 ultimate denigration promise enacting, re-enacting join. 46 preordained cases, ignored above, recognized relevance 'Congress concept articulated Reynolds Sims, 377 533, 84 1362, 506 (1964), protect against dilution power.' 390, 438, 486, quoting 588, 843, (opinion Harlan, J.). 532-533, 1706-1707, 479-480; 565-566, 569, 831-832, 833, 16-17, 19.15 refers resulting something less (i. e., proportional) power, reduction power. White Regesr, 412 755, 765-766, 2332, 2339-2340, 314, 324-325 Whitcomb Chavis, 403 124, 149, 1858, 1872, 379 (1971). acknowledged showing Negro-elected representatives unconstitutional dilution: "To claims (of dilution), enough group allegedly discriminated potential. plaintiffs' produce processes leading nomination equally open participation members residents legislators choice." Regester, 2339, 324. 48 379.16 49 constitutionally govern proceedings. readily transferred adjusting proof. underrepresents question."17 If showing, rejected, reasons adoption demonstrated.18 50 Application us Preliminarily, themselves serve think assessed fill. Proportional assure entire when, found, occupied white-elected members. approach focusing municipalities conceal making time, sending three-district alteration approval. beyond actually him considered, camouflaged prophylactic evaded.19 51 Thus correctly began considering given long voting,20 allows expectation seat (14% council), 34.5% population. Manifestly, serves underrepresent then, properly, turned consider excluded full considerable exclusion, seriously contested here.21 52 Louisiana's majority-vote operate practical matter defeat majority,22 residual public schools, assemblies, recreational facilities, transportation, housing, employment, remain; officeholders unresponsive needs looked many tactics recently, employed remarkable success keep State. Louisiana 380 145, 147-150, 85 819-821, 709, 711-713 (1965). access narrowed candidates all-important Democratic primary run tickets. For nomination, tantamount victory election, critical placed ticket winning, mayoral candidate. ticket. rare occasions city, organization, electorate. equal whites. 53 underrepresented infringes protected justification save very community manner distortion immediately explanations suspect light. dispersed, collected curving band runs east-west. north-south divide parts. Counsel intervenor vividly described division oral argument: 54 "You walk Jefferson Parish eight ten miles St. Bernard line face band, belt, parallels river curve fashion city. people live wealthy sections town lake Charles Avenue river. rest left over blacks, heavy concentrations, slices pieces bologna Tr. Oral Arg. 30. 55 Jonathan Eckert, staff primarily drafting "inevitable result" II's orientation minority, bare majority." App. 346. 56 relies goals mandate II. own belief Eckert's testimony drafted east-west 336-337. case, goals, taken combination, establish One claimed groups. goal. Two aims numerical equality resultant compact contiguous. Both accomplished well. Three proffered ward precinct natural boundaries, manmade boundaries. observed one-person, one-vote restrictions, precincts small integrity honored latter minimizes adverse violating except communities social economic interests. erratically keeps intact. 57 seventh compelling, mandates scheme: keeping incumbents apart re-election.23 Four northern cy. East-west 125, 232, 235, remain apart. 344. desire merit contexts, surely stand justify 58 acceptable dilutive requested judgment.24 "Whenever prohibitions forth 1973b(a) title determinations sentence 1973b(b) enact seek administer whenever 1968, third 1972, institute qualification, prerequisite, contravention 1973b(f)(2) title, enters person comply procedure: Provided, enforced chief legal officer appropriate official interposed objection sixty days submission, good cause shown, facilitate expedited affirmatively indicated made. Neither affirmative indication made, General's object, subsequent enjoin procedure. event indicates sixty-day period reserve reexamine submission information remainder accordance section. heard judges provisions 2284 Title appeal lie Court." V). 1973b ed. subdivisions 4. Fed.Reg. 9897 behalf six convenience sometimes referred defendants intervened due proportionately age structures populations differ significantly 72.3% age, 57.1% age. U. S. Commission, 368, 383. draft attributable opposition Algiers River. interest promoting bridge across They represented councilman, opposed divided Algiers, n. Supra, quieted placing address "purpose." Supra. course, proposition bodies 379. worth noting, calculations scrutiny, II-A text, Infra, theoretical 1.7 councilmen. realistic prediction seem actual operation elected. 142. At various points 40-page understanding criteria terms quoted text above. hereafter appear, coincide isolating separately examining verbalizations contained reaching conclusion, decide reserved 535 7, 1708, 472, 481, identical previously let dealt what Last Term circumstances permit annex territory annexation changing approved aspect likely results "fairly reflect(ed) exists annexation." 371, 2301, 256. met involves former Cf. Brennan's dissenting 388, 2312: "I take fundamental objective protection Present levels effectiveness population." (Emphasis original.) intervenors advised statistics indicating 1974 whole increased 38.2%. Assuming accuracy estimates, increase proportionate district, Taylor McKeithen, 499 F.2d 893, 896 (C.A.5). improvement predecessor lessening discrimination, nonetheless continue discriminate unconstitutional. suffers disability, rationally so. There violative Wright Rockefeller, 376 52, 603, 512. closest Gomillion Lightfoot, 364 339, 81 110, allegations motivated gerrymandering municipality's involving Amendment's "one man, vote" 506. considered apportionments violated ethnic minorities. Fortson Dorsey, 433, 498, 501, 401, 405; Burns Richardson, 384 73, 86-89, 1286, 1293-1295, 376, 387-389; 379; 314. remotely violation enunciated cases. voting" "standard, (1973). 790 suspends regulations pending scrutiny determine Amendment." 334, relating purpose-and/or-effect testing seamless web. approaches three: (1) unconstitutionality, irrelevant, insofar sheds purpose; (2) irrelevant; (3) either unconstitutionality. recent seemed approaches. 512 110 (1960), determinative, although isolated seems approve elucidates purpose. 512; 341, 127, 113. 73-74, 614-615, 525-526 (Goldberg, J., dissenting). McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 453, 1101, 1119, 393, 414 (1961), protection-First expressly imputing improper purpose, invalidated 378-379, 2296 2307-2308, 260-261 (1975), suggests bad invalidate all. Completely contrary hold irrelevant examined Palmer Thompson, 217, 224-225, 1940, 1944-1945, 444-445 (1971), O'Brien, 391 367, 384-385, 88 1673, 1683-1684, 672, 684-685 (1968), vigorously attack assert unlawful Between positions impermissible law. Education Allen, 392 236, 243, 1923, 1926, 1060, 1065 (1968); Abington School Schempp, 203, 222, 83 1560, 1571, 844, 858 (1963). synthesize indeed synthesis possible, necessarily expansion tests juggled years. Ely, Legislative Administrative Motivation Constitutional Law, Yale L.J. 1205 (1970). gives expand Katzenbach Morgan, 641, 1717, 828 Undoubtedly, enacted, confers similar any, independently resolution 4, said expanded Act. Insofar concerned, believe Evaluation just ambiguous task tool analysis. 444-445; 684-685. Therefore, demonstration ordinarily suffice. If, conclusively statute's quote 140, giving content text. looms thinks counterproductive frozen appeal, ultimately unrealistic retain modification Jurisdictions undertake reason. instance, disapproved, amend charter. compelled decisions. (1964). virtual necessity prompt argues strongly favor plans. eventually return nondiscriminatory Equally unsuccessful attempt paint dramatic. currently distributed follows: Population Registered Voters % 31.6 22.7 62.2 50.2 C 40.2 24.6 D 43.7 36.3 E 49.4 42.8 621. lawsuit, manner: 29.1 22.6 64.1 52.6 35.8 23.3 43.5 36.8 50.6 43.2 624. positive convinces "abridgment" 50.2% (which fails mention) calls "clear" (although idea vote) 52.6%. emphasizes whereas beneficial 49.4% 50.6%. Rep. 91-397, 6-7 (1969), Admin. News 3282-3283. 10-11 (1965), 162, Code 2437; 315-316, 811-812, 779-780, 94-295, 781. 10-11. remains "frozen" proceed interruption, substituted. 94-196, Either way, litigant obtains relief seeks apportionment. pressure judged rigorous fear thought encourage voting. psychologically proliferation federally reviewed. starts." 115 Rec. 38486 (1969) (remarks McCulloch). 38517 Anderson); 30-31 Act's limited term prompt, gradual, relief. Originally, twice extended, few years; argued contemplated slow forward movement, sanctifies, quick remedial "fix." "abridge" assessment potential, recognition relative absolutely determination. useful glean minority's Moreover, annexations, example fairly measured scheme. 378, 2307, 260. (1960). Today simple easy increases decreases To contrary, difficult excessively demanding judicial energies. size concomitant likelihood delegate, shows ameliorative. Will so? gerrymandered ones? retrogressive? declines elsewhere. decline 52.6% Majority ameliorative, outweighed simultaneous decrease Districts C, become becomes "safe"? dividing concentrations voters? implies, 139 11, harmonize 245 ante, outside context. lend negative terms; others how result. goes manager government, termed retrogressive, minority? Or switches change, wards gerrymandered? realize, involve questions above answer. My point, exactly substantially compound complexity posing complex views issues, jurisdiction. treatment ambiguous, observation claim" unconstitutional, 142 14, raise suggesting once raised, frustrate freezes places order victims." 328, 818, 786. bringing back door, proceeding. puzzling intends confine holds avoid looking deciding claim, 158-159, exclusion appears extend Yet, obvious challenge include broadened considerably reject evidently considers. focus caused accentuates infra, necessitates schemes. 314 factors finding constitutional, engaged hypothetical adjudication, future incorporating nn. 4-5, holding, implicitly, validity, grounds, apportionments. whose likewise laws, borrowing developed corpus entirely appropriate. Seeking source scarcity predate incorporation construing incorporation, developments discussed reasons, help formulating cited page 136-137, 8. Chavis stands proposition. substantively supports notion absent denial process. meant attack, includes sweeping group's court. 766-767, 324-325; 149-153, 1872-1874, 379-382. 20% five-member might placement Minority despite perfectly municipality creation Negro-majority impossibility. On hand, assuming survive ways center Out reasonably expect two. self-imposed limitation expectancy seat. 137 us, lay approach, smaller consideration, grosser numerically tolerated. tendency challenged Such encouraged Anderson Martin, 375 399, 454, 430 printed ballots Appellants propriety accuracy. rule winner candidates, plurality wins majority, run-off election. multi-member filled. interested asserts goal "historic traditional boundaries" "preserve continuity electorate." Brief 28-29. fact, record conclusive purely 206-207; 344, 557. reached Court: remand. 260-261.

Category: 1