Rick,
This is the third iteration of Shaw, I learned from reading the Raleigh
News and Observer of 9/30.
After the 1996 elections, the same three-judge panel (2-1 Democratic)
who'd heard Shaw I and II approved a legislative plan that reduced the
black population percentages of the 1st and 12th congressional districts
from 57 to 47, made them more compact, but almost surely winnable by
incumbents Clayton and Watt. The Justice Dept. gave the plan Section 5
preclearance.
A young, unsuccessful Republican politician then challenged both the
state House plan (which hadn't been challenged in Shaw, but which had some
ugly minority districts) and the new congressional plan before another
3-judge panel, this one 2-1 Republican, including a former legislative aide
to Jesse Helms. Although this panel eventually rejected the state
challenge because of laches, it did rule the congressional plan
unconstitutional and ordered a new plan drawn. Eventually, the legislature
redrew the 12th, making it 35% black and surely endangering Watt. The
3-judge court hasn't yet ruled on the 1st district, and won't until after
the 1998 election. The state nonetheless appealed, contending that the
prime factor in drawing the districts wasn't race, but partisanship and
incumbency protection (Watt), and that therefore, under Miller, the plan
was constitutional. The district was surely no more ugly than a great many
other districts, either, though who knows whether it qualifies as what a
court would have drawn under Vera?
The 1997 plan kept every incumbent happy and split the delegation 6-6.
I'm not sure what the court-ordered plan does in a partisan way. The
elections were delayed, and the Reps were trying to recruit a star
candidate against Watt, but I don't think they succeeded. (Gingrich came
to NC to do so.)
I'm actually quite surprised that the Supreme Court took the case,
because it looked like from the VA, NY, and IL cases that it was sick of
redistricting cases for the decade. Any speculations from the list?
Morgan
Prof. of History and Social Science, Caltech
snail mail: 228-77 Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125
phone 626-395-4080
fax 626-405-9841
"Peace if possible, Justice at any rate" -- Wendell Phillips
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Public replies: ELECTION-LAW@chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Message no.: ELECTION-LAW 981001-4
Archives: http://mlm.kentlaw.edu/election-law . For e-mail access,
contact netadmin@chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU .
Please do not cite to this posting without first obtaining the
permission of the sender.
To unsubscribe or digest: listproc@chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Technical questions: netadmin@chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Other inquires about the list: OWNER-ELECTION-LAW@chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
-------------------------------------------------------------------