Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case argued on April 20, 1993. The ruling was significant in the area of redistricting and racial gerrymandering.The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause.On the other hand, bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of ...
Case Summary of Shaw v. Reno: The State of North Carolina, in response to the U.S. Attorney General’s objection that it had only one majority-black congressional district, created a second majority-black district.
Read and learn for free about the following article: Shaw v. Reno (1993) If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website. If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.
Justia › US Law › US Case Law › US Supreme Court › Volume 509 › Shaw v. Reno Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993) Opinions; Audio & Media ... SHAW ET AL. v. RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL. ... affected racial group's "residential patterns afford the opportunity of creating districts in which they will be in the majority." 430 U. S., at ...
United States Supreme Court SHAW v. RENO(1993) No. 92-357 Argued: April 20, 1993 Decided: June 28, 1993. To comply with 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 - which prohibits a covered jurisdiction from implementing changes in a "standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting" without federal authorization - North Carolina submitted to the Attorney General a congressional ...
Citation. 509 U.S. 630, 113 S. Ct. 2816, 125 L. Ed. 2d 511, 1993 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. The Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court) held that the Appellants, Shaw and others (Appellants), have a legitimate claim that North Carolina’s redistricting scheme was so irregular on its face that it could only be viewed as an effort to segregate races for the purposes of voting, without ...
A summary and case brief of Shaw v. Reno, including the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, key terms, and concurrences and dissents. ... Shaw v. Reno. United States Supreme Court 509 U.S. 630 (1993) ... A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and;
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Syllabus. SHAW et al. v. RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al.
Reapportionment plan for North Carolina Included 1 black minority-majority district 1st plan rejected due to lack of voting representation that would come from just 1 district Revised plan includes a second district This district had an unusual shape White residents claim this is
The U.S. Attorney General rejected a North Carolina congressional reapportionment plan because the plan created only one black-majority district. North Carolina submitted a second plan creating two black-majority districts. One of these districts was, in parts, no wider than the interstate road along which it stretched.