Legal Document

129 S. Ct. 1231 (2009) Gary BARTLETT, Executive Director of North Carolina State Board Elections, et al., Petitioners, v. Dwight STRICKLAND al. No. 07-689. Supreme Court United States. Argued October 14, 2008. Decided March 9, 2009. *1238 Christopher G. Browning, Jr., for Petitioners. Carl W. Thurman III, Wilmington, NC, Respondents. Daryl Joseffer, States as amicus curiae, by special leave the Court, supporting Walter Dellinger, Sri Srinivasan, Irving L. Gornstein, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, D.C., Roy Cooper, Attorney General, Grayson Kelley, Tiare B. Smiley, Alexander McC. Peters, Susan K. Nichols, Raleigh, N.C., Justice KENNEDY announced judgment and delivered an opinion, in which THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALITO join. This case requires us to interpret § 2 Voting Rights Act 1965, 79 Stat. 437, amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973 (2000 ed.). The question is whether statute can be invoked require state officials draw election-district lines allow a racial minority join with other voters elect minority's candidate choice, even where less than 50 percent voting-age population district drawn. To use election-law terminology: In that not majority-minority district, if could its choice support from crossover majority voters, drawn accommodate this potential? *1239 I arises somewhat unusual posture. authorities who created now invoke defense. They argue required them particular way, despite laws contrary. are provisions Constitution prohibit General Assembly dividing counties when drawing legislative districts House Senate. Art. II, §§ 3, 5. We will adopt term used courts refer both sections constitution Whole County Provision. See Pender Bartlett, 361 N.C. 491, 493, 649 S.E.2d 364, 366 (2007) (case below). It common ground requirements like Provision may superseded federal lawfor instance, one-person, one-vote principle Equal Protection Clause Constitution. Reynolds Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 84 1362, 12 Ed. 2d 506 (1964). Here otherwise would violate That, turn, depends on how interpreted. begin election district. Representatives larger two chambers State's Assembly. District 18 body lies southeastern part Carolina. Starting 1991, drew include portions four counties, including County, order create African-American satisfy Act. Following 2000 census, comply Provision, rejected Assembly's first statewide redistricting plans. Stephenson 355 354, 375, 562 377, 392, stay denied, 535 1301, 122 1751, 152 1015 (2002) (Rehnquist, C. J., chambers); 357 301, 314, 582 247, 254 (2003). present form emerged third attempt, 2003. By time had fallen below then drawn, no longer geographically compact Rather keep whole, however, it splitting New Hanover counties. has 39.36 percent. App. 139. Had left have 35.33 Id., at 73. reason was give potential group's choice. Ibid. Failure do so, submit, diluted voting strength violation 2. May 2004, five members Commissioners filed instant suit court against Governor Carolina, officials. plaintiffs alleged 2003 plan violated into districts. 5-14. state-official defendants answered 25. As trial recognized, procedural posture *1240 differs most cases. raise result, stated, they "in position" bearing burden proving occurred absent 18. Pet. Cert. 90a. considered defendant established three threshold liability under Thornburg Gingles, 478 30, 50-51, 106 2752, 92 25 (1986)namely, (1) group "is sufficiently large constitute single-member district," (2) "politically cohesive," (3) "that white votes bloc enable ... usually defeat preferred candidate." Gingles requirement, concluded that, although African-Americans were 18, "de facto" because get enough African-Americans' candidate. ruled politically cohesive, thus satisfying second requirement. And later, stipulated requirement met. 102a-103a, 130a. determined, based totality circumstances, split County. sustained rationale. 116a-118a. Three appealed court's ruling reversed. held "minority must numerical area consideration before Section creation prevent dilution group." 502, S.E.2d, 371. On premise determined mandated "constitute citizens age." 507, 374. ordered redraw 510, 376. granted certiorari, 552 ___, 128 1648, 170 352 (2008), affirm. II Passage 1965 important step struggle end discriminatory treatment minorities seek exercise one fundamental rights our citizens: right vote. Though whole subject debate controversy, prompted little criticism. likely explanation general acceptance enacted, tracked, part, text Fifteenth Amendment. prohibited practices "imposed or applied any political subdivision deny abridge citizen vote account race color." 437; cf. Const., Amdt. 15 ("The shall denied abridged race, color, previous condition servitude"); see also S.Rep. 162, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., pt. pp. 19-20 (1965). Mobile Bolden, 446 55, 60-61, 100 1490, 64 47 (1980), 2, *1241 read, "no more elaborates upon... Amendment" "intended effect different Amendment itself." 1982, after ruling, Congress amended giving current form. original employed intent prohibiting only those applied... abridge" 437. version effects, prohibits manner results denial abridgment" 96 134, 1973(a) 1982 amendments added subsection, 2(b), providing test determining occurred. relevant states: "(a) No qualification prerequisite standard, practice, procedure imposed abridgement color [or membership language group], provided subsection (b) section. "(b) A (a) section if, shown processes leading nomination equally open participation class protected opportunity electorate participate process representatives their choice." 1973. construed (1986). residents multimember submerging black majority, denying identified "necessary preconditions" claim constituted actionable 2:(1) "sufficiently 2752. later apply cases involving districts, such alleging been between Growe Emison, 507 25, 40-41, 113 1075, 388 (1993). case, party does proceed analyze circumstances. supra, 79, 2752; Johnson De Grandy, 512 997, 1013, 114 2647, 775 (1994). III turns satisfied makes up parties *1242 agree all parts analysis, so dispositive is: What size sufficient requirement? At outset answer might appear difficult reach, said "demonstrate district." U.S., 50, seem matter, indicates demonstrate "a majority." But again reserved what separate questionwhether, "when plaintiff alleges practice impairs ability influence, rather alter, results, showing geographical compactness suffice." Growe, 41, n. 5, 1075; 46-47, 12, since but declined decide minimum necessary Voinovich Quilter, 146, 154, 1149, 500 (1993); 1009, 2647; League Latin American Citizens Perry, 548 399, 443, 126 2594, 165 609 (2006) (opinion KENNEDY, J.) (LULAC). consider minimum-size case. appropriate review terminology often describe various features relation composes numerical, working population. Under doctrine, these See, e.g., Voinovich, 1149 ("Placing sizeable therefore `safe' ensures able choice"); Holder Hall, 874, 922-923, 2581, 687 (1994) (THOMAS, concurring judgment). spectrum influence outcome cannot elected. LULAC, 445, 2594 J.). involves intermediate type districta so-called Like make population, least potentially, help cross over 501-502, 371 referred sometimes "coalitional" recognition coalition voters. Georgia Ashcroft, 539 461, 483, 123 2498, 156 428 (2003); Pildes, Is Law Now War Itself? Social Science 2000s, 80 N.C.L.Rev. 1517, 1539 (hereinafter Pildes). risks confusion coalition-district claims groups coalition's Nixon Kent 76 F.3d 1381, 1393 (C.A.6 1996) (en banc). address *1243 here. petitioners (the court) persuade some them. Petitioners still "effective districts." petitioners' theory keeping cracking 46, 11, 2752 (vote "may caused dispersal blacks ineffective voters"). So, contend, override law leaving reject claim. First, we conclude, contrary mandate "have 1973(b) 39 standing alone better worse same relative strength. That is, votersincluding minorities, whites, bothto reach cannot, own without assistance others. Recognizing circumstance grant preserve purposes forging advantageous alliance." Hall Virginia, 385 421, 431 (C.A.4 2004); (minorities "could dictate electoral outcomes independently"). Nothing grants protection coalitions. "[M]inority immune obligation pull, haul, trade find ground." 1020, 2647. Although confront today cautioned "cannot mechanically," 158, reasoning claims. impose duty potential, best attracting setting out claims, explained "[u]nless possess absence challenged structure injured practice." 17, stated "needed establish representative 40, 1075. Without showing, "there neither wrong nor remedy." *1244 There difference "own choice" made coalition. "would modified eliminated" cross-over-district 1149. Only once, dicta, framed anything rule. 1008, 2647 (requiring candidates choice"). proposition, inherent here, entitles maximum possible strength: "[R]eading define failure maximize tends obscure very object run counter textually purpose. One suspect famine, entitled (much infer) mere guarantee feast." 1016-1017, Allowing crossover-district revise reformulate inquiry baseline jurisprudence. Mandatory success upon serious tension minority-preferred candidates. majority-bloc-voting met where, definition, numbers (We skeptical bloc-voting example, almost 20 issue, respondents conceded court.) explained, significant chosen inferior voters." 49, 15, Were dispense call framework 490, 8, 2594. (SOUTER, dissenting part) ("All aspects analysis progeny rethought analyzing ostensible districts"); Metts Murphy, 363 (C.A.1 2004) banc) (per curiam) (allowing influence-district survive motion dismiss noting effort prong Gingles"). need workable standards sound judicial administration. rule draws clear legislatures alike. exacting standard Determining liei.e., function districtswould place untenable position predicting many variables tying race-based assumptions. judiciary directed predictions premises experienced polling *1245 analysts experts assess certainty, particularly long term. For pursue inquiries: percentage supported past? How reliable future elections? types together past trends continue? incumbency did depend race? historical turnout rates among same? Those questions speculative, answers (if supposed) prove elusive. inquiries ought inferred purpose capable making refined factual inquiries, "are inherently ill-equipped" "make decisions highly judgments" sort require. Holder, 894, 2581 underlying importance: cautious interpreting classifications predictions. statutory urge raises constitutional questions. infra, 1246-1248. Heightening concerns further fact applies nationwide every jurisdiction local law. Crossover-district predictive judgments about familiar, two-party contests regional jurisdictions feature view face task discerning patterns nonpartisan city commission, school board, water authority. data determinations nonexistent elections jurisdictions. speculative given especially context elections, voters' personal affiliations views issues play role. Unlike proposed relies objective, test: Do geographic area? provides straightforward guidance charged 485, SOUTER, (recognizing "clear-edged rule"). Where cracked assigning elsewhere, thenassuming factors satisfieddenial discernible high degree speculation prediction attendant Not arbitrary invention, foundation principles democratic governance. significance, process, means but, racially polarized voting, put *1246 Given provision, difficulties assessing restraint rule, appeals Instead, interpreted factor standard. F.3d, 427-430 2004), cert. 544 961, 125 1725, 161 602 (2005); Valdespino Alamo Heights Independent School Dist., 168 848, 852-853 (C.A.5 1999), 528 1114, 120 931, 145 811 (2000); Cousin Sundquist, 818, 828-829 1998), 525 1138, 119 1026, 143 37 (1999); Sanchez Colorado, 97 1303, 1311-1312 (C.A.10 1996), 520 1229, 117 1820, 137 1028 (1997); Romero Pomona, 883 F.2d 1418, 1424, 7, 1425-1426 (C.A.9 1989), overruled grounds, 914 1136, 1141 1990); McNeil Springfield Park 851 937, 947 (C.A.7 1988), 490 1031, 109 1769, 104 204 (1989). Cf. Metts, 11 (expressing unwillingness "at complaint stage foreclose possibility" claims). decline depart uniform interpretation guided years. sure, mechanically regard nature claim." remains asserting show preponderance evidence greater contends exceeds thresh-old. Nor involve allegations intentional wrongful conduct. discrimination affects analysis. Brief Amicus Curiae 14 (evidence "tends suggest equal unnecessary proceeding ultimate totality-of-the-circumstances analysis"); Garza Los Angeles, 918 763, 771 1990). Our holding there minority. B arguing restrictive point "equally participation" protect "opportunity An "opportunity," argue, occurs well districts; extended opportunities, say, protection. emphasis word "opportunity" expense "equally." mechanism through work constituencies advantage. Minority *1247 furthermore, odds 2's test. Grandy confirmed "the error treating conditions exhausting enquiry 2." Instead preconditions, consistent determine meet violation. 1075 (describing "Gingles factors"). extent doubt calls resolve avoiding Clause. Clark Martinez, 543 371, 381-382, 716, 160 734 (2005) (canon avoidance tool choosing competing plausible interpretations text, resting reasonable presumption intend alternative doubts"). Of course, "moral imperative neutrality driving force Clause," permitted "as last resort." Richmond J.A. Croson Co., 488 469, 518, 519, 706, 102 854 (1989) (KENNEDY, "Racial respect carry dangers. Racial gerrymandering, remedial purposes, balkanize factions; threatens goal system mattersa Fourteenth Amendments embody, Nation continues aspire." Shaw Reno, 509 630, 657, 2816, 511 If throughout Nation, "it unnecessarily infuse virtually redistricting, raising questions." 446, J.); 2498 concurring). result substantial increase number mandatory predominant motivating legislature's decision." Miller Johnson, 515 900, 916, 115 2475, 132 762 (1995). scrutinize enters districting gauge voting. Injecting measure concern registration influence. easiest alliance party, suggested using within proper yardstick 485-486, primary of... tending win election"). approach replace administrable "judicial rules politics" truly "controls" dominant party's process. McLoughlin, Limbo: Coalitional Districts, Party Primaries Manageable Vote Dilution Claims, N.Y.U.L.Rev. 312, 349 (2005). More troubling inquiry's *1248 fusion affiliation determinant partisan considerations themselves lines. Vieth Jubelirer, 541 267, 317, 124 158 546 (2004) (STEVENS, dissenting); id., 316, 1769 judgment); Pildes 1565 (crossover-district essentially "entitlement certain seats"). Disregarding relying combination presume effective perilous enterprise. rest predictions, matter law, hold timeat decennial apportionment cycles beyond. relationship distort frustrate search neutral principled rationales districting. Petitioners' reverse canon avoidance. invites divisive precedents consequences extending C permissibility discretion. Assuming determination, factors, serve diminish significance encouraging toward goal. option gives lead isolation, more. noted 5 Act, "various studies way [crossover] 482, 2498. Much allows choose method complying 480-483, When note concerned maximizing strength, 1022, and, creating preserving should entrench command, too, pose concerns. supra; supra. wish free prohibition exists. Majority-minority areas unlikely preconditionbloc 1244. place; lawful discretion deemed appropriate. 1567 ("Districts designed places encouraged coalitions across lines, *1249 obligation"). canand shoulddefend violations pointing evidence, diminished intentionally destroy Amendments. Reno Bossier Parish Bd., 471, 481-482, 1491, 730 13-14. however. recognizes instance. inconsistent similar argument different. groups' "to choice," ed.), while stringent asks change "denying abridging vote," 1973c. 2594; Parish, 476-480, 1491. presence retrogression lack violation." 482-483, districts: "leaves room" employ IV Some commentators waningas evidenced by, white. Note, Future Majority-Minority Districts Light Declining Racially Polarized Voting, 116 Harv. L.Rev. 2208, 2209 2216-2222; 1529-1539; Bullock Dunn, Demise Districting Black Representation, 48 Emory L.J. 1209 (1999). Still, ancient history. done ensure races share traditions; continued progress. irony, differences expanding "statute meant hasten waning racism politics." Crossover are, joining forces passed foster cooperation. expand reaches require, voluntary cooperation society achieved. *1250 affirmed. ordered. THOMAS, whom SCALIA joins, judgment. continue adhere expressed my opinion 891, authorize claim, regardless ed.) (permitting challenge "voting procedure"); 893, (stating terms "`standard, procedure'" "reach enactments limit citizens' access ballot"). disagree, therefore, set forth (1986), basis evaluate "has produced disastrous misadventure policymaking." 2581. reasons, concur STEVENS, GINSBURG, BREYER join, dissenting. 50% ever qualify 1965(VRA) putative whose no, relief scheme dilutes rights. yes: minority-opportunity cohesive combined majority. plurality's view, age (CVAP) provide remedy lacking incorrect phrase natural meaning; populations routinely "elect effects disturbing flatly obvious never count States' pack additional contracting having transcending divisions securing representation. promoting blocs, role proxy identification heightened measure. Recalling basic vote-dilution just *1251 far astray plurality gone. VRA "resul[t] race." 1973(a). abridgment "based circumstances," 1973(b). Since read "vote dilution," understood distributing ways reduce 47-48, classic patterns. polarized, systemically discount either "by voters" concentration excessive majority," eliminate neighboring Treating remediable harm protects merely ballots box, fair effective. 47, points follow. speak chance representation desired, identifiable measuring 88, (O'Connor, judgment) ("In violates construct `undiluted' strength"). Several baselines imagined; could, compare alternative.[1] surprisingly, conclusively approach; game, killing. dispositive, rough proportion 1013-1023, Thus, facts history geography, starting comparison percentage. Ibid; *1252 436, (LULAC) ("We proportionality inquiry, comparing total [minority] population").[2] Second, assessed looking overall multidistrict plan. congressional seat dilute vote, systemic submergence treated So look entire (normally, statewide), creates insufficient territory whole. 436-437, Third, ultimately dilutive himself reasonably improve actually selected. 1001-1002, deficiency injury redress. essay understanding asked at-large deprived answering, now-familiar circumstances: "First, .... emphasized over, they, circumstances explicitly Congress. 425-426, 1011, each serves gatekeeper, ensuring proceeds plenary real redressable condition, claims: placed disadvantage owing happenstance independent politics. 51, second, cohesion, distinct *1253 first, demonstrating injures failing available arose issue law: 50%, disposed favorite, think yes. nothing solely 155, (1993) ("[Section 2] says districts"). contrary, "focuses exclusively apportionment," ibid., prescribed functional approach: ("A ..."). leaves vindicate interest expressly 2: desired representative. apparent moment took exists treat legitimate (let out). 90, 1, ("[I]f probably prefer, demonstrated Voting-Rights 1553 Pildes) ("What magical, then, become formal conventional created? safe probability electing candidate, functionally identical, candidates?"). earlier comments much CVAP redress answer: course constituting amply empirical confirming regularly modest 1531-1534, 1538. 38.37% candidates, Cty. 494-495, *1254 366-367 (2007), finding gone unchallenged nine (VAP), elected 2004 election. 109. 39% VAP, surely surprise legislators possibly [the] true elastic, proportions shift future, past. 1527-1532 (explaining 1980s gradually 50%); 1527, 26 went 65% `rule thumb' district"). polarization declined, downward easier satisfy. threshold; dismissal too small elect, "crossovers" numerous inference place. one, record experience 25% condition. majority-bloc analytical (noting interrelationship factors); post, 1260-1262 (BREYER, dissenting) (looking mathematical cognizable district). whatever be, respondent sum, addresses realities, practical 39%-minority know bit good 50%-minority fact, better. value flexibility plans turn beneficent reduction "quintessentially race-conscious calculus," thereby moderating reliance exclusive decisions, 1547-1548 contrast Court's bizarrely hard coalitional `convey message identity predominantly racial.' encourage kind integrative, crossracial thought with, ideal of, Constitution" (quoting Bush Vera, 517 952, 980, 1941, 135 248 *1255 (1996))). superior precisely factions break mold discourage divisions. conclusion recognize misunderstanding mistake epitomized following assessment question: "[B]ecause [in 18]." Ante, 1242-1243. ante, 1246 ("[In districts,] another takes tautology: simply looks off whites be. statement true, demonstrates nothing. Even assumed comparable attract (and credited condition), beyond disproportionately configuration before, (that being elect) examining broader pattern roughly proportionate opportunity. Hence, saying equals another's, known, mean either, both, fails grasp proved disproved statewide. specific justifications counterfactual supportable tautology. 1 seems prior somehow remedy, emphasizing spoke "`the elect'" representatives. 1243 (quoting, 2752). concedes repeatedly decision today's question. (plurality opinion); 1149; recent *1256 applying majorities formulated approach. 430, ("[I]n `the possibility existing choice'" 2647)). These short shrift plurality. event, ignored Gingles's reservation looked "potential elect" fail dictates compete singlehanded already, obtaining district; 45% 6% promises 51% crossover, logic distinction artificial terms. past, voter relatively low, 55% district's rely 1527-1528. (and, am aware, addressing it) rendered failed factor. say assuming unrealistic turnout, theoretically "potential" support; abstract potentially successful, assumption en masse crossovers home. recognizing entail exponential expansion districting; goes "entitl[e] strength." reflects gatekeeping 1242-1243 ("African-Americans already 1252-1253, needed accepting Bartlett's imply potential. factor, *1257 choice; here total. 3 fear maximization finds parallel "create tension" "[i]t see. 49% 2% definition" doubt, definition otherwise, met, 98% voted above, 1254, floor ceiling allowed concept tend stick degree. precise however; refute cohesion standard.[3] 4 argues qualifying demanding forcing engage come success. 1244-1245. judgment; satisfied, factually messy enquiries afford, existence 1254. conserves uncertain amount resources, ignoring authority strike statute's coverage. misunderstands suggesting *1258 conflict 480-482, (2003): VRA, U.S.C.A. 1973c(b) (Supp.2008). While correct 1249, save inconsistency pronouncement. diminishes 1973c(b), measured opportunity, 477, proportionality. sense counts 6 Finally, tries insistence invoking policy avoidance, construing avoid unconstitutional result. suggests allowing lower "require Nation," 1247, implicating ("excessive" equated frequency districts). backwards. inevitably byproduct traditional factors. closer meeting reference fewer will, purposefully. seeking equality go bridge gap produce focus race. plurality, believe poses concern, blocs favor opinion's perversity portends. Consider Carolina's scheme. approximately 20% VAP[4] distributed *1259 58a. VAP 9 12. Supra, 1253-1254. 21 17.5% 109-110. close According it, requisite living crossover. reckoning, in, most, ibid. satisfies opportunity.[5] faced wants litigation, follows legislature induced encouragement voluntarily, 1249-1250, itself attack pointed suggestion favoring runs Shaw. boiled down option: packs eradicating Perhaps aberrant implication, eventually attempts disavow it. asserts "§ districts.... [But] 1248. also, 1249 (crossover "can evidence... opportunity..."). fiat, legal reasoning; attempt explain compliance sought ways. voluntarily *1260 brings requiring eliminating take statute. elimination cause fathom why bring short, taken control eliminated goals statute, perpetuate concentrated quintessential manifestations consciousness respectfully dissent. SOUTER's powerfully persuasive concrete implicit his exposition. severely undermines estimable aim. Today's returns ball Congress' court. Legislature clarify reading BREYER, full. write separately light bright-line (used gateway) administrative objectives. amounts simple device meritorious not. objective critically believes, gateway Assume minority, obtain votes, representatives" consensus ed.); opinion). blush, respect. After all, bloc, always choice? constitutes voters? realities behavior, "no." Nathaniel Persily Amici 5-6. ("Fifty seen magic complete eligibility, registration, community extreme [S]ome others (emphasis added)); 1254 dissenting). 100% cohesive. Except overwhelming populations, necessary. "preferred *1261 "consensus try includes, imperfect may, context, "minoritypreferred" excludes, smaller can, Why directly enough, (tending cohesively) (rather candidate) office? 1253 ("[E]mpirical confirm[ ] . groups" "regularly majority"); With 1529-1535 (reviewing formula tied example: Suppose pick ratio twice calculate latter need) cohesiveness 89% cohesively group, needs (Such 45 55 voters; 40 time; candidate; majority's 55.) cohesiveness, assure success, likelihood consensus, preferred, reflecting reality contradictory, itself, acknowledged 59, (1986) (finding rate 26% 49%, average one-third). difficulty totally accurate statistics *1262 administer flexibly, opening (or closing) gate (in probable merits case) variances (e.g., instead 40% 15. 2-to-1 perfect rule; unlike (of non-minority votes) focuses problem hand, consequently separates sheep goats. 45, (The "`functional' process" "`a searching evaluation reality.'") 97-417, p. (1982)); 94-95, ("[T]here indication intended single, universally applicable undiluted conditions. "). cases, effects. Most range divergent approaches critical differenceas should. word, SOUTER explains ill suited add adopts ends. Better tests, needed, found. respect, NOTES [1] previously illustrated stylized fashion: "Assume hypothetical 1,000 divided 10 each, along dispersion careful manipulation 7 Each 51 remaining groupings safety scattered seven 1016, [2] entitlement Rather, qualifications 1014, [3] entirely inappropriate vehicle exact 1254-1255. science literature developed statistical methods nuanced 1534-1535 "falloff rate" social scientists comparative Democratic compared falloff during 1990s 9%). briefed us, 130a, accomplish quantification third. [4] Compare Dept. Commerce, Bureau Census, Age Population Voting-Age (PHC-T-31) (Table 1-1), online http://www.census.gov/population/ www/cen2000/briefs/phc-t31/index.html (as visited 2009, Clerk file) (total 6,087,996), Table 1-3 (black 1,216,622). [5] logic, fracture submerge majority-dominated 35% covered all. implications there. declares "does minority." 1246. compels absurd invidious fracturing deprive invidiously

Classification Label: 1