Legal Document

528 U.S. 320120 S.Ct. 866145 L.Ed.2d 845 SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as being done in connection with this case, at the time opinion issued. The constitutes no part of Court but has been prepared by Reporter Decisions for convenience reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL BOSSIER PARISH SCHOOL BOARD APPEAL FROM DISTRICT FOR COLUMBIA No. 98 405. Argued April 26, 1999 Reargued October 6, Decided January 24, 2000* Bossier Parish, Louisiana, jurisdiction covered §5 Voting Rights Act 1965, thereby prohibited from enacting any change "voting qualification[,] prerequisite[,] standard, practice, or procedure" without first obtaining preclearance either Attorney General District Court. When, following 1990 census, Parish School Board submitted proposed redistricting plan to General, she denied preclearance. then filed action Section 5 authorizes voting that "does not have purpose and effect denying abridging right vote on account race color." Appellants conceded Board's did "effect" under §5, since was "retrogressive," i.e., worsen position minority voters, see Beer States, 425 130, claimed violated because enacted discriminatory "purpose." granted On appeal, disagreed Court's proposition all evidence dilutive (but nonretrogressive) forbidden §2 irrelevant whether retrogressive §5. Reno Bd., 520 471, 486 487 (Bossier I). This vacated remanded further proceedings adopting its plan, id., 486, leaving question inquiry ever extends beyond search intent, ibid. remand, again Concluding, inter alia, there nonretrogressive purpose, court left open prohibits such purpose. Held: 1. rejects contention these cases are mooted fact 1992 never used next scheduled election occur 2002, when new place based upon data 2000 census. In least one respect, probable continuing effect: serve baseline against which appellee's evaluated purposes. Pp. 6. 2. light §5's language Beer's holding, does prohibit 7 20. (a) order obtain preclearance, must establish bears burden persuasion both points. See, e.g., I, supra, 478. Beer, concluded that, context vote-dilution claim, phrase "abridging color" limited term effects. U.S., 141. Appellants' qualifying "purpose," very same impose limitation retrogression, means discrimination more generally, untenable. BankAmerica Corp. 462 122, 129. Richmond 422 358, 378 379, distinguished. argue subjecting prongs produces prong trivial reach, covering only "incompetent retrogressors." If were true if adequate justify giving words different meanings "purpose" would instances applied construction innumerable statutes barring conduct particular "purpose effect," yet appellants unable cite single case. Moreover, value even cover additional so-called incompetent retrogressor: Government need refute jurisdiction's prima facie showing counter regarding actual effect. Although virtually identical §2(a) Fifteenth Amendment read refer meaning faithful "abridging" used. reading exacerbate "substantial" federalism costs procedure already exacts, Lopez Monterey County, 525 266, 282, perhaps extent raising concerns about constitutionality, Miller Johnson, 515 900, 926 927. resolution issue renders unnecessary address appellants' challenge factual conclusion intent. 16. (b) notwithstanding I explicitly "le[ft] another day" two prior decisions reached does. Dictum 141, holding Pleasant Grove 479 462, 16 F. Supp. 2d 29, affirmed. Scalia, J., delivered Court, Part II unanimous, Parts III, IV joined Rehnquist, C. O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, JJ. concurring opinion. Souter, an dissenting part, Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, JJ., joined. opinion, Notes 1 * Together 406, Price et al. also appeal court. Opinion 2 NOTICE: subject formal revision before publication preliminary print Reports. Readers arerequested notify Decisions, Supreme Washington, D. 20543, typographical otherformal errors, corrections may made goes press. Nos. 405 406 3 ON APPEALS FORTHE 4 Justice Scalia These present 79 Stat. 439, amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c 6 second us, we thus recite facts procedural history brief. Like every other political subdivision State practices, Act. 1973b(a), (b); 30 Fed. Reg. 9897(1965). It therefore qualification prerequisite voting, respect voting," administrative judicial Columbia. 1973c. governed 12-member Police Jury elected single-member districts 4-year terms. early 1990s, set out redraw electoral demographic changes reflected decennial 1991, adopted which, like effect, contained majority-black districts, although blacks up approximately 20% parish's population. May 28, districting General; months later, 8 (Board) constituted fashion Jury, too undertook after During course redistricting, appellant-intervenor George Price, president local chapter National Association Advancement Colored People (NAACP), adopt districts. fall 1992, amid some controversy, rejected Price's suggestion Jury's 1991 own. 9 4, 1993, had precleared interposed objection asserting "new information" specifically, NAACP demonstrated "black residents sufficiently numerous geographically compact so constitute majority districts." App. Juris. Statement 405, p. 235a. disclaimed attempt compel "adopt plan," maintained "not free unnecessarily limits opportunity voters elect their candidates choice." Ibid. 10 After request reconsideration, Before voters. (In 130 (1976), held retrogressive.) Instead, distinct claims. First, they argued should creating many create, Act, bars practices. Second, contended nonetheless 11 Bd. Reno, 907 434 (DC 1995). As claims, could deny simply §2. prevent "[from doing] indirectly what cannot do directly," stated permit section prove 5." Id., 445. borne proving legitimate, nondiscriminatory purposes: assure prompt (since Jury), enable easy implementation unlike NAACP's required redrawing precinct lines). 447. jurisdictional statements noted jurisdiction. 517 1232 (1996). 12 agreed violates §2, (1997) Since us uncertain decision, plan. 486. our disposition, "whether intent." "The existence purpose," said, "and relevance issues decided remand." 13 comparatively brief relying on, clarifying, extensive earlier 29 1998). response invitation summarily "the record support presence absence 31. "imagine 'non-retrogressive, nevertheless discriminatory, purpose,' those imagined here." ourselves remand: namely, 14 considered, greater length, how impact bore concluded, applying multifactor test articulated Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 429 252 (1977), allegations animus insufficient 2d, 31 32. 15 contended, first, clearly erroneous, second, determination We 1118 (1999). proceeding merits, dispose contends now moot, "will purpose." Motion Dismiss Affirm 9. Under Louisiana law, school board members La. Rev. Ann. §17:52(A) (West One month 1998 took place. until time, concede, upcoming census available "one-man-one-vote" precedents apportionment Accordingly, appellee argues, declaratory judgment longer moment dispute presents live "case controversy" purposes Article III Constitution. Preiser Newkirk, 395, 401 (1975); Mills Green, 159 651, 653 (1895). 17 posit several contingencies put use including resignation death failure agree replacement 2002 election. They assert hold improper, "could seek" injunction voiding elections ordering special election, Brief Opposing 3, "might entitled" injunction, Appellant Opposition pause consider possibility somewhat speculative events suffices keep alive, Absent successful subsequent it, rather than 1980 predecessor contains quite Whether (and precisely how) future represents baseline, and, so, depend proper. 18 turn, then, merits. 19 press claims initially raised statements: intent Our claim first. When considered longstanding interpretation application dilution leads covers dilution. 20 earlier, demonstrate A jurisdiction, therefore, make showings: color," 478 (judicial preclearance); 28 CFR 51.52(a) (1999) (administrative preclearance). 21 addressed no-effect requirement allegation case presented reapportionment rights black Reasoning "insur[ing] voting-procedure lead retrogression racial minorities effective exercise franchise," "a legislative enhances franchise can hardly 'effect' diluting within §5." words, challenge, "denying qualified, "effect," 22 contend modifies generally think untenable text, recasting x" y x." past, refuse attribute sentence, depending object modifying. 129 (1983) (declining give "other than" modified "banks" "common carriers" clause). 23 point broader 358 (1975). That involved requested annexation reduced population city Richmond, Virginia, 52% 42%. unit lower percentage blacks, long "fairly reflect[ed] strength Negro community exist[ed] annexation" violate 371. reasoned justified peculiar circumstances cases: 24 "To otherwise forbid annexations require, price approval annexation, assigned proportion council seats before, hence permanently overrepresenting them underrepresenting elements community, nonblack citizens annexed area. unwilling Congress intended consequence 25 refused, however, similar prong, stating acting effecting reduction population, though merely 379. 26 acknowledged created discontinuity between regard nothing ex necessitate avoid invalidation areas annexing unit. certainly stand fundamentally latter requiring former urged here. approved hypothetically disapproved retrogressive. found necessary exception normal retrogressive-effect principles, retrogressive-purpose routine annexation. sheds little 27 textual justification "would reduce matter," Federal Reargument 13; "effectively delet[e] 'purpose' prong," Reply 3; retrogressor," expect muscular effect." 192(d) (prohibiting sale article "for manipulating controlling prices" meatpacking industry); 1467a(c)(1)(A) (barring savings loan companies engaging activity behalf association subsidiary evading law regulation applicable association"); 47 541(b)(3)(B) (1994 ed., III) cable franchising authorities imposing "that prohibiting, limiting, restricting, conditioning provision telecommunications service operator affiliate thereof"). one, aware none. enough whenever enacts statute having x," entirely separate unlikely fails context, retrogressor." conduct. With prevail. specific where persuasion, denied. spared necessity countering cases, often complex undertaking. advantage, plus ability reach malevolent incompetence, represent massive addition statute, less justifies laws.1 At bottom, disagreement rests analysis, opposition Beer. overruled, arguing "untenable" conclude (as Beer) refers 1, elsewhere indeed, retrogression. 1973(a) ("No [practice] shall imposed manner results denial abridgement citizen color "); Const., Amdt. 15, §1 ("The abridged race, color, previous condition servitude").2 "abridge," however whose core "shorten," Webster's New International Dictionary (2d ed. 1950); American Heritage (3d 1992) necessarily entails comparison. makes sense suggest practice "abridges" compare practice. uniquely deal specifically procedures status quo changed: "abridges vote" relative quo, denied, (however be) remains proceedings, contrast, involve (much commonly) itself, comparison hypothetical alternative: "results [an] "abridge[s] [the vote]" ought be, itself changed. referring Amendment, differing contexts used.3 argument applies equally require preclear both. strikes inconceivable prospect accept said context. change; replaces, stopped advance extraordinary burden-shifting attacked through action. repeatedly noted, prevents backsliding, affirms backsliding. 478; (1995); 141.4 explains why sole failing continuation quo. To matter unconstitutional risk worse. For example, ameliorative result preserve change. sum, suggesting vote-dilutive purposes, ask declined I: blur distinction "shift[ing] focus nonretrogression dilution, chang[ing] benchmark existing hypothetical, undiluted plan." 480. Such 282 (1999), Miller, Most importantly, finds 32 Notwithstanding note "an unless discriminates basis Constitution." suggests acts unconstitutionally. 33 most implausible interpretation. decided, established well constitutional violation, White Regester, 412 755, 765 766 (1973), Washington Davis, 426 229, 238 245 (1976). statement meant suggest, anticipating (without argument) later else gutting violation would, despite sufficed much plausible explanation referred consisting "denial" vote, "abridgement." antibacksliding rationale avoiding preservation worse quo) criterion, arguably word "deny" (unlike "abridge") import quo.6 34 event, clear pure dictum: unconstitutional. 142, n. 14. And quoted dictum actually 481; Shaw Hunt, 899, 912 (1996) (Shaw II); 924. clear, hand, reaffirm today: schemes constitutionality distinct. 35 "Although scheme nonretrogressive, reason, immune challenge. Indeed, satisfies still enjoined unconstitutional." 509 630, 654 (1993) I) (emphasis added). 36 City Lockhart 460 125, 134 (describing follows: remained regressive increase degree entitled preclearance"); Allen Elections, 393 544, 549 550 (1969) ("Once successfully complied requirements, private parties enjoin enforcement enactment traditional suits attacking "). states neither nor " 'shall bar enforcement' [a practice]." (quoting 1973c). fully remedy leaves untroubled produce unconstitutionally 37 (1987). unusual pattern. Grove, Alabama inhabitants, none whom registered officials appear unaware, 465, sought annex parcels land, inhabited few whites, vacant likely whites near future. upheld acted rejecting city's unaware discriminate: 38 "[The city's] incorrect assumption impermissible relate circumstances. looks effects changes, well. Likewise, anticipated 39 "It annexation] motivated, minimizing strength. just strength." 471 472 (citation footnote omitted). 40 viewed because, contending lacked residents, time. However, above passage suggests, intending Put way, whether, retrogressive; instead, achieve once include, operation compared inapposite 41 43 ordered. 44 Souter criticizes "assum[ing] easier . cases." Post, 19, (opinion part). obvious discussion always prove, sometimes (which force doing violence English language). acknowledges "intent dilute conceptually simple, whereas abridgment-in-fact readily defined identified independently 28. 45 §3(c) provides, guaranteed Fourteenth retain period deem appropriate during commenced enforced 1973a(c). assist confers power redistricting. say, contemplate struck down relief assume function Columbia proceedings. suggested court's §3(c), challenged "subsequent action." intimate point, limit nonprobative character cases. 46 3. Even parallel fail simple reason Amendment. Voinovich Quilter, 507 146, (citing 142 143, (1976)). contrary Souter's assertion, post, 20, part), "suggested" much. Gomillion Lightfoot, 364 339 (1960), proposal boundaries Tuskegee, Alabama, exclude 400 excluding white voter. 341. municipal elections, vote-dilution, concept voting-rights opinions nine years later. 569 (1969). relied plurality Mobile Bolden, 446 55 (1980), opposite, appellees' terms: answer that. freedom anyone. entail elected. Having Negroes 'register hindrance,' Appeals error believing invaded protection case." 65; 84, (Stevens, judgment) (characterizing concluding practices directly affect access ballot"). 4. backsliding forms embarks lengthy expedition into history. He returns empty-handed, he thought andnonretrogressive doubtful passed 1965 mind. acknowledges, 1969, 25, 13, 1969 extension at-large consolidation counties "new, unlawful ways diminish Negroes' franchise" developed H. R. Rep. 91 397, pp. 48 5. asserts "[t]he Department's refusing determined Beer," deference. part); accord, dissenting). But Department limited, 136, sustaining denial, O. T. 1975, 73 1869, 18. reject outcome depends implication owe deference) raw statute. 49 Breyer "[i]t seems Mississippi 'moral character' 1966 (after Act), 'the race,' permit, 0.4%, 0.3%, age Forrest County register." (dissenting opinion). above, today extend violations outright individual's opposed "abridgement" attempted enact "moral character" 1966, precluded §4, certain types tests devices altogether, arisen. 1973b(a)(1), (c). 50 51 concurring. 52 almost seven ago. effort, throughout litigation "safe" majority-minority district ensure member. Ironically, while pending, three majority-white Board. record, vividly illustrate federal intervention spawned unnecessary. 53 54 Ginsburg joins, dissenting. administration past quarter century, consistently employed today. Apart deference constructions afforded, points starting statutory plain 56 impossible alone includes temporal measure; noun verb tense have" imaginably rise requires be. entire purpose" anyone anything mind present-tense, intentional effort "den[y] abridg[e] race." Third 1847 (1966). Ergo, municipality intends abridge 57 am persuaded Justices Marshall not, disavow precedent explain my profound tension majority's consistent acceptable standard identifying effects, war text. 58 reasons length respectfully dissent. 59 60 61 qualification. reconsider correctness decision (1976) "effects" regardless, depriving vote. 62 out, ante, 22, jurisdictions limiting number stratagem contriving rules various kinds perpetuating face adverse decrees." South Carolina Katzenbach, 383 301, 335 "stratagem" moving target consequent runaround. Perkins Matthews, 395 396 (1971). similarly State's rules" retrogress not. places, historical close zero, proved needed most. 63 An example drawn clear. Mississippi, 1962, three-tenths 1% 229 925, 994, 86 (SD Miss. 1964) opinion), rev'd, 380 128 (1965). due large county registrar's voter registration requirements. Prior 1961, registrar refused citizens. Lynd, 301 F.2d 818, 821 (CA5 1962). who allowed apply register subjected difficult offered assistance taxing applications. registrar, applications citizens, supply explanation. 822. Fifth Circuit "[f]ailing process registrations applicants applicants." 823. 64 Mississippi's "immediate response" "good moral requirement," 997, characterized abuse hands officials," 313. judge believed designed Circuit's "defy[ing] Appellate qualified [to vote]." 997. defiance maintaining rolls, increasing supremacy. 65 kind designed, demanded Perkins, (Congress knew "Department d[id] resources police effectively Act," institute laws might racially purpose"); 314 (Prior "[e]ven favorable ha[d] finally obtained, affected switched decrees"). 66 Act's contrary. 89th Cong., 1st Sess., (1965) ("Barring contrivance caused result, methods"); S. 162, pt. (joint views Senate Judiciary Committee, describing Parker, 236 511, (MD Ala. 1964), responded instituting rejection applicants"); Hearings 6400 Subcommittee House Committee Judiciary, (testimony Katzenbach) (discussing "able, apparent defeat courts, devise whole methods discrimination"); 1564 (similar). 67 obvious, race," register. irrespective complexity surrounding test, today's "yes." 68 J. 69 70 join, part. 71 show amendment reflect race. dissent indifferent below level. precursor sorts holds sufficient strength, achieves symmetry achievement well-matched error. mistaken restricted wrong text corresponding adhere strong policy respecting reexamine demand recognized compounded indefinitely, mistake expanded erroneous scope section's prong. 72 shown (let intentionally discriminatory) erroneous. highly unconvincing. shows (School Board) decades resistance desegregation order. illustrates exactly sort relentless bad faith led poses invites thing. While substantially unnoticed narrow crucial insistent way implausibility checklist considerations assessing going intent: background minorities, antecedent events, departures procedures, contemporary decisionmakers. 266 268. directed follow enquiring remand 488 enquiry reveals parish occurred. 74 institution general governance known representatives chosen parish. showed numerical malapportionment among Jurors revised parish, modify lines. Based information Justice, understood received summer 1991. fact, admitted, dilutes Plaintiff's Remand 12; is, participate choice. Thornburg Gingles, 30, (1986). 75 shifts reapportion same. approached devising joint common jury, jury rebuffed Board, 172a (Stipulations 83 84), forced go alone. History provides good indication expected endeavor. 76 stipulated, energies "limit evade" obligation desegregate schools. 216a (Stipulation 237). schools mid-1960's, flagrantly defiant tactics era, 217a 237), discloses obstructiveness 1980's, polarization makeup rose, 218a 241 243), disproportionate assignment faculty predominantly increased, 240). superintendent testified came parents' requests positive examples children, 289, leaders uniformly insisted accord decree, distributed schools, models students, 326 327; Tr. 126 128. 77 Other intransigence centers terms integration decree 1970 maintain "Bi-Racial Advisory Review Committee" equal "'recommend attain unitary system improve education parish.'" 182a 111). represented overseeing committee place, Superintendent William Lewis), met times mid-1970's attendance, 183a 112). short-lived "Community Affairs replace Committee." Despite charging 'with responsibility investigating, consulting advising periodically matters pertinent retention [sic] system,'" 114), disbanded leading member tone quickly turned toward becoming policy,'" 184a 116). "Policy," inevitably implicated committee's subjects recommendations (such recruitment teachers placement 115)) fell squarely mandate. unsurprising achieved day. 239); 139 P. Davis). 78 About appointed Committee," now. efforts tell Following rebuff able relaxed timetable, 1994. 147a 11), September 5, meeting. No taken proposal, 174a 89 90), issued inaction, noteworthy ignored customary concerns. Whereas incumbency protection, 251; cf. 152a 26), pitted pairs incumbents each incumbent resided. 181a 109).2 disregarded attendance zones, included containing 174a, 151a, 191a 88, 141). moreover, called total variation populations exceeding normally gauge satisfaction "one person, principle, 162a 163a 58); 231 232; 147, four failed measure compactness own cartographer, 174 176, noncontiguous elements, 234 235. addressing own, hired consultant advised Gary Joiner. Joiner (according Joiner's testimony) perfectly accordance Record, Doc. (direct testimony 5), estimated take him 250 hours spent nearly year public alternatives. 80 March branch wrote asking chance play role process. 184. letter action, request. 175a 93). August, again, concert organizations, seeking express process, policies bearing desegregation. 187 189; 94). Once response. 81 Being frustrated lack responsiveness, asked help national Redistricting Project, sent map black-majority 177a 98). official, told unacceptable request, Project provided meeting, explaining drawing 178a 99 100). Several larger map, 100), cartographer legal advisor, attorney, dismissed hand splits, 179a 102). 82 There implications objectionable According leader, Henry Burns personally favored representation idea.3 142. Barry Musgrove hostile creation district. 182.4 consideration, pace suddenly speeded up. 17, district, abruptly 180a 106). hearing week attended overflow crowd, spoke petition over 500 signatures urging consideration favor 434, 439 1995) I), explained guarantee 108). Nonetheless, unanimously absent (who weeks fill vacancy) abstaining. 109). submit 1993. 110). 84 significance enhanced examining detail mentioned dispute, testing looking critically resolving disputed favor. 85 stipulate end segregation ago fulfilled. falling "more heavily whites," Civ. Action 94 1495 (D. C.), 12, strength," 21. stipulated history, correspondingly speaks louder, grows forceful closer look aspects residential patterns meet conditions 51, opening door footing others. Gingles group district." 50. satisfy criterion. stipulation "it reasonably City," 154a 155a 36); (statement Musgrove), 192a 143).5 third conditions, politically cohesive white-majority block minority's preferred candidate, introduced expert Parish's patterns. 201a 207a 181 196); 163 173 (declaration Dr. Richard Engstrom). acknowledging "African realistic choice population." 174.6 87 diluted votes dividing neighboring communities interests around municipalities, district.7 154 156 Castille III); 141 'appear[ed]' 'fracturing,' 138), "divid[ing] 'population cohesiveness, lives area, [and] lot commonalties' '[the] fracture adjoining districts,' 189a 190a 133). B 88 lawyer objected split precincts state law. concedes boards seek juries parishes, did. 150a 151a 23). Government's experts, 214, 217, 354, cartographic consultant, 23), option 89); 102), pursue possibility, 188a 128).8 Judge Kessler surely correct inability divide genuine obstacle Supp., 461 becomes clearer splitting (or districts) realizes gave serious splits. his estimate prepare 173a 86), indicated borrow recently devised build explored "[s]everal least," 271. start splitting, "as as" criteria Splitting became insuperable create C 90 view listed series "allegedly impacts" "[t]hat ignores boundaries, interest, outlandishly compact, contiguity, deviations resulting (+ 5%) law." 1998) II). "too theoretical, attenuated" probative corroborating "deliberate attempt." whatever cause "theoretical" "attenuated" generally. together treat discussions rested finding plan's inference inconsistent expressed 924 (1995), refusal maximize discrimination. however. Georgia improved establishing betrayed 906 908, 923 inferred arise maximizing concededly adopted; arose possible Gingles. here maximum II, (Silberman, concurring), significant all. Johnson show. 92 ground discounting inherent approving evidence, powerful reasons. lines apparently pretextual. supposedly legitimate choice, safe harbor unlikely. harbor, day Interest pressure intensified promptly proposals considered. attractive seemed offer safety demands fair reflection described possessing "tenacious quo," 32, embraced running form.9 D 93 manifested sedulous attained faced act interest odds principles anticipation significantly Policy lines, General's produced proposing concrete NAACP, sidestepped successive technical culminating patently pretextual objection. pretexts resisting wearing thin, evidently scrapped intention original tailored unwonted haste year-old manifestly unsuitable pointed agrees, objections unavailing reasonable doubt chose squelch reflecting incredible submergence unintended illegality If, below, infra, behind disqualifies record. negate (like effect) impossibility 469 worth noting, likewise lose assume, disqualifying intervenors. ("We imagine here"). her shown; raises "'the definite conviction [has] committed,'" Concrete Pipe Products Cal., Inc. Construction Laborers Pension Trust Southern 508 602, 622 Gypsum 333 364, (1948)). Regardless regardless 95 "have tracks Amendment's [or] congressional 325 327 (1966), terminology naturally carrying Kozminski, 931, 945 (1988) ("By employing language, focusing prohibition comparable conditions"); Morissette 342 246, 263 (1952) ("[W]here borrows art accumulated tradition centuries practice,it presumably knows adopts cluster ideas attached borrowed body learning convey instructed"). Any carries texts differently fit Constitution presumptively wrong.10 96 abridgment something subtle drastic complete cast ballot, separately forbidden. Abridgment enjoyment power, other. principal diminished actionable regime denies enjoy. 47; 1973. participation effectiveness subspecies gives lesser practical enjoys, reduces voter's preceding provided. dealt see, 645 (1993), know violative abridgement. coverage rights, Oregon Mitchell, 112, (1970) (Harlan, "abridg[e]" 494 495 (Breyer, judgment).11 97 (save outlandish. abridgement, adopted, newly emancipated obtained practically mere reduced. shares alone, receive nondilutive. 493 (use indicates plans purposes). Such, agility keeping step ahead challenges versions Act) schemes, diistinctive feature perpetuated vote: "Congress case-by-case inadequate combat widespread persistent inordinate amount energy overcome obstructionist invariably encountered lawsuits. enduring century systematic decide shift advantage inertia perpetrators evil victims." 328 (footnote Congress's sights discrimination, happens frustrate confined subset schemes. lie center survives exceedingly odd conclusion. 100 purports shoulder offering "context" narrower cognate systems. Ante, 8, 13. reading, changed, regime, extant From proposed, quo; (because say), constitutional. This, course, unqualified suggest. 101 position, limitations need, 102 Insofar authority defining precedent. stare decisis supersede legislation), Hilton Public Railways Comm'n, 502 197, 202 (1991), rule construed stay construed. thing ignore extending discredited reasoning previously unspoiled provisions. That, 103 wrongly derogation portending unconditional uncompromising resting abridge). imposition nontextual fragment Report 'undo[ing] defeat[ing] won' blacks. 140 (1969)).12 Relying statement, distorting selectivity, replete references perpetuate truly Representatives, "even defeat[s] resisters discriminating. Barring methods," (1965), stave off reform. By making trifling Dallas terminate registering handful 11, well, (Joint Individual Views Sens. Dodd, Hart, Long, Bayh, Burdick, Tydings, Dirksen, Hruska, Fong, Scott, Javits). losing requirements 'as applicants.' 1964)). Thanks traditions avoided retrogression13 stymied improvements. days ongoing become moot litigants back square shouldering dodges come. 152, (Marshall, 104 frustration manifest extended 1969: 105 "Prior act, resorted decrees enactments Congress. preclude circumvention remedies [§5 enacted]. increased undertaken new, Negro-supported candidates. Commission Civil reported measures form switching concentrated facilitating predominently counties. affecting filing fees running; abolishing appointive offices candidates; office officials, withholding candidates." 106 115 Cong. Rec. 38486 (remarks McCulloch) (listing old goal" control process). 107 1975: 108 "In recent importance [§5] widely promoting preserving gains jurisdictions. 109 110 "As increases, include areas, adoption plans." 295, 111 situation better ("promoting"), stopgap getting ("preserving"). 112 understand oblivious objective, decade realized modifying stayed jump ingenious preventing registration, 113 decrees. suppose try maneuvers evade itself." omitted); 315. 114 nascent jurisprudence lists targeted 766, 768 769 (1973). fine, full provides. reservation grown familiar authorize pour poison bottles. wrong, interpretation, excuse compound error.14 116 Giving purpose-to-abridge broader, erroneously truncated facially irrational scheme. subordinate power; exact calibration identify intended. weight discriminate "abridge" direction aim, reference details system. 117 Dilutive different. theory proportional representation, Davis Bandemer, 109, 131 (1986) White, J.), 925 926. Thus rest idea allocation voters; alternative Holder Hall, 512 874, 880 (1994) J.); 887 888 (O'Connor, judgment); De Grandy, 1018 (1994). Looking avoids difficulty derivation. Congress, irrational. 118 puts 33. "particular deference" "central role" administering Dougherty Ed. (1978); Sheffield Comm'rs, 435 110, 132 390 391 here, demonstrates coherent declared 119 wider capacity Amendment,15 enjoy virtue consistency apart (1975), territorial reducing distinguishes "nothing annexation." laid eccentric 120 this: 121 ward fairly reflects exists hold, direction, barred bloc command fewer council; effected decline influence city. enlarged Furthermore, undervalued, underrepresented council. 122 true, vote." 123 Richmond's "undervaluation" "underrepresentation" involves exception. postannexation thereafter smaller held, outside unlawful, rendered §5: 124 "[I]t achieving plain, labor it. official otherwise, discriminating legitimacy forbids grounds 378. 125 follows lacking underlying distinguish (1987), vain. logic lawful, fact. added electorate, nonexistent diluted. peradventure: possible. overruling Grove. 127 seeks "future retrogression" nipping contingency bud formed. gymnastic, overlooks contradiction Grove's said. circumstances, 472, (a Beer). "plausible" "minimizing," "causing to." more: "One thwarting [integration] provide growth monolithic block, advance. Cf. [422 U.S.,] 378." 472. one. Today's contradicts proffers precedential Instead observes it) "exacerbate 'substantial' exacts." 15. raise cost penny behavior equality plainly guarantees. thwart ingenuity Its bring country transcending Now, promise diminished. Now executive officers illegal excuse. mootness. considering stepping subsequently firm. 103; 72, designations portions deposition David Harvey); 85. member, Marguerite Hudson, Plain Dealing, towns, black, stated: "[T]hose people love Dealing don't want get big job, country, Welfare, Dealing."App. 118. 133 statement. 56. suggested, uncertain, 448 tantamount cure admitted dilution; event ambiguous dispersed draw drawn, 160a 161a 52, 53), Cooper Plans, defendant-intervenors, much, (Cooper Plans); 193a 147). 135 win 180), Air Force base, 206a 196), considerably higher figures candidates, hostility Jeff Darby), Jerome 143 144 Johnny Gipson). 136 7. Counsel cross-examining experts state-law "split[ting] corporate lines." 189. proposition. municipality, 137 8. splits unappealing. assumes 194a 195a 151), meeting criteria, 27, ibid., establishment 14, 269 270, 277. all, lots them, supporter 129, interim score. 138 My Thomas' predicate relevant findings, impeded evidentiary issue. choices suffered 10. argues construe uniformly, regulating loans, franchises. find interpreting §5; breadth. lacks 11. price-fixing (even simpler 27). Here, hotly disputing them. goal, paltry given heart 55, (1980) (plurality opinion); 339, 346 (1960) (singling treatment blacks). Mobile, (suggesting dilution); (reserving question); (endorsing Amendment); exclusion elections. excluded gerrymandered Tuskegee unincorporated could, most, officials. Changing physical image evoked "dilution" encompass unequal. modern analysis. reliance "'deny abridge'" mirrored 61, e.g.,Voinovich 157. 12. promulgated attention returned duration amended. 505 506 part) 1982 amendments); Amendments 400; 1970, "retrogression" describe regimes. appears 141; appearance 544 says "lengthy history" me "empty handed" notions particularly guard untried. next. 497 judgment). 2, invalidates neutral purposeful coextensive understanding effects-only uncertainty, disparate minorities. divided Compare 484, explained, repeat requires. 494. Both already, prohibits. tides buffeted ebbed low approve

Classification Label: 1