Legal Document

421 U.S. 477 95 Supreme Court Reporter 1706 44 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 312 DALLAS COUNTY, ALABAMA, et al.v.F. D. REESE al. Number 74—1077. May 19, 1975. PER CURIAM. 1 Appellees are residents of the city Selma, Ala., who brought this action to challenge system by which members Dallas County, Commission elected. The system, is established a state statute,1 provides for countywide balloting each four commission members, but requires that member be elected from residency districts.2 Appellees' sconstitutional claim was premised on fact populations districts vary widely, with result only one resident Selma can commission, although contains about one-half county's population.3 2 After extensive discovery, District Southern Alabama entered summary judgment appellants, County and Commission. court relied heavily our decision in Dusch versus Davis, 387 112, 87 1554, 18 656 (1967), concluded: 3 '(T)he fundamental principle representative government has been fulfilled Commissioner's tenure depends upon vote qualified voters electorate. This alone Commissioner represent county not his own residential area.' Jurisdictional Statement 15—16. 4 Appeals Fifth Circuit considered case en banc reversed, 8—6,4 505 Federal Reporter, 2nd 879 (1974). majority concluded unequal diluted votes residents, resulting discrimination invidious. It distinguished basis particular facts case, involved seven council membersselected boroughs, could live anywhere city; according Appeals, effect assure 11-man assembled without cooperation either 'representative' populated boroughs or unrestricted residency. In present other hand, structure such three commissioners reside outside control even though they 'represent' slight population.5 dissenters thought controlled. We agree, reverse Appeals. 5 reaffirmed enunciated Fortson Dorsey, 379 433, 438, 85 498, 501, 13 401, 404 (1965), when an official's 'tenure electorate he must vigilant serve interests all people county, merely those home district.' Because plan used 'merely as residence candidates, voting representation,' ibid.; supra, U.S., at 115, S.Ct., 1556, commissioner represents citizens entire district resides. think teaching Dorsey ignored chose instead focus factual element accorded absolutely no significance opinion case. Nor do we understand what attached presence subject requirement, given basic officials elect them, their neighbors. 6 was, course, correct recognizing does entirely insulate constitutional attack. As noted: 'If borough's represented borough, . different conclusions might follow.' 116, 1556. Similarly, approvingly quoted portion Court's opinion, including following passage: 7 "As becomes effective, if it then operates minimize cancel out strength racial political elements population, will time enough consider whether still passes muster." Id., 117, 8 clear, however, contemplated successful attack raising question based findings impermissibly dilute identifiable population. Rather than basing its conclusion sort, theoretical presumption reach determination were victims invidious discrimination. That rather chooses them. But precisely proposition rejected Dusch. 9 For foregoing reasons, cause remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 10 so ordered. 11 Reversed remanded. 12 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS took part consideration Act 328, § 6, Acts (Feb. 8, 1901) (as amended). Our appellate jurisdiction 28 Code KF62 1254(2). Judge Probate ex officio chairman tie among commissioners. He ballot may within county. shown 1970 official census, population follows: City Selma....... 27,379 West................. 6,209 South............... 14,203 Fork................. 7,505 Bell concurred dissented part. would have evidentiary hearing fashioning distinction Dusch, prior panel court, Keller Gilliam, 454 55 (1972). According reasons stated text, '(i)n Keller, preserving rule possible, struck down.' 879, 885 Given districts, see n. 3, difficult how Circuit's applicable 27,379, while rural combined 27,917. Thus should together, reflect 'representation' possible any fashion obtain 'representing' whose unrestricted. These bearing disposition seem rationale decision.

Classification Label: 1