Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Shaw v. Reno was a United States Supreme Court case involving the redistricting and racial gerrymandering of North Carolina's 12th congressional district (pictured). The United States, among the first countries with an elected representative government, was the source of the term gerrymander as stated above.
Johnson that racial gerrymandering is a violation of constitutional rights and upheld decisions against redistricting that is purposely devised based on race. Racial gerrymandering effectively maximizes or minimizes the impact of racial minority votes in certain districts with the goal of diluting the minority vote.
A majority-minority district is an electoral district, such as a United States congressional district, in which the majority of the constituents in the district are racial or ethnic minorities (as opposed to Non-Hispanic whites in the U.S.). Race is collected through the decennial United States census.
Ohioans don't like gerrymandering, which is why both sides of the Issue 1 debate say they have a solution for it.
The U.S. Supreme Court recognizes two types of gerrymandering — political and racial. The court considers political gerrymandering to be a “political question,” which it will not address.
Sanders, sought to curb racial gerrymandering. The latter mandated that, in each state, congressional districts had to be of equal size. But the justices declined to outright ban gerrymandering.
Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning "affirmative gerrymandering/racial gerrymandering", where racial minority-majority electoral districts are created during redistricting to increase minority Congressional representation.
The U.S. Supreme Court may be on the verge of making it even harder to win legal challenges accusing state officials of racial gerrymandering - the illegal manipulation of an electoral district's ...