Shaw v. Reno (1993) AND ITS PROGENY

• Author: Bernard Grofman
• Pages: 2409-2410

Page 2409

North Carolina is subject to the preclearance provisions of section 5 of the VOTING RIGHT ACT OF 1965. The Voting Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected a North Carolina congressional plan that provided for only a single black-majority congressional district, insisting that two such districts be drawn and suggesting several hypothetical configurations. A resubmitted plan with two majority?minority districts was given DOJ preclearance, but the new district in that plan looked nothing like any of the DOJ suggestions. The proposed North Carolina Twelfth Congressional District stretched 200 miles, included parts of numerous cities, and achieved contiguity of some of its parts only via connection along a single road, Interstate 85.

Because a majority of Supreme Court Justices, including SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR, had previously seemed willing to assent to race-conscious ELECTORAL DISTRICTING to safeguard the fundamental right to vote, the Court's 5?4 decision invalidating North Carolina's districting plan in Shaw v. Reno (Shaw I) came as a surprise to many experts. In a MAJORITY OPINION authored by O'Connor, and joined by WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST, ANTONIN SCALIA, ANTHONY M. KENNEDY, and CLARENCE THOMAS, the Court explained that it was troubled by the peculiar configuration of the Twelfth Congressional District, the least compact in the nation, and by the history that led to its creation, in which race appeared to play a major role. The majority also enunciated a new legal standard for legislative action on REPRESENTATION, in which an excessive reliance on race as a criterion in drawing electoral district was unconstitutional. In plans in which race was implicated, states were now required to prove that there was a COMPELLING STATE INTEREST in establishing the plan and that the districts were "narrowly tailored" to serve that interest.

While Shaw I merely remanded the North Carolina congressional plan to the district court for consideration under the new legal standard, Shaw v. Hunt (Shaw II)

(1996), also decided 5?4 with the same lineup of Justices, declared North Carolina's congressional plan to be unconstitutional, rejecting claims that aspects of its peculiar configurations could better be assigned to political than to racial considerations. Even before Shaw II, however, Shaw I inspired similar challenges to race-based districting in other jurisdictions.

Most Shaw -type...