Court Opinion

ID: 9690809
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 19:45:20.907465+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:04.708923
License: Public Domain

JOHN H. WOOD, Jr., District Judge
(dissenting in part and concurring in part):
To that part of the majority’s decision wherein it is held that the multi-member legislative districting plan for Tarrant *1055County is unconstitutional, I respectfully dissent and reaffirm my Dissenting Opinions in Graves I and Graves II.
As was concluded in Graves II, supra, at pages 671-672, with respect to District 32, “the only substantiable finding that can be made is that, having full access to the political process, the minority has been relatively unsuccessful at the polls. Such lack of success is not sufficient to support a finding of invidious discrimination. See Whitcomb v. Chavis, supra, pages 159 — 160, 91 S.Ct. 1858.” This conclusion remains, in my opinion, a valid one.
During the pendency of the appeal of Graves II, the Texas Legislature specifically undertook to abolish all multi-member legislative districts in the State of Texas, substituting in their place single-member legislative districts. (Texas 64th Leg., H.B. No. 1097). Therefore, without expressing an opinion with respect to the constitutionality vel non of the multi-member legislative districts under attack by the plaintiffs, the Supreme Court remanded the case to this Court “for reconsideration in light of the recent Texas reapportionment legislation and for dismissal if the case is or becomes moot”. White v. Regester, 422 U.S. 935, 95 S.Ct. 2670, 45 L.Ed.2d 662 (1975). I, therefore, reaffirm my Dissenting Opinions in Graves I and Graves II.
ADOPTION OF PLAN OF DEFENDANT STATE OF TEXAS
While I do not necessarily agree with the reasoning expressed herein by the majority and their Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as demonstrated above and in my three prior Dissenting Opinions, I do concur with the results achieved by the decision of my learned colleagues in ordering the adoption of the plan submitted by the Attorney General of the State of Texas for holding the forthcoming legislative elections for the reasons announced by the Supreme Court in White v. Weiser, 412 U.S. 783, 93 S.Ct. 2348, 37 L.Ed.2d 335, (1973).