Shaw v. Reno Supreme Court Case

Introduction

• The case is part of the AP Government curriculum.
• Focuses on the issue of racial gerrymandering.

Facts of the Case

• Occurred in 1990 in North Carolina.
• None of North Carolina's representatives were black, despite 20% of the population being black.
• Post-1990 Census, North Carolina created a majority-black district.
• The Justice Department suggested a second majority-black district, which was created.
• The newly created district was oddly shaped, leading to allegations of gerrymandering.

Definition of Gerrymandering

• Gerrymandering: Drawing district lines to favor one group over another.
• Partisan Gerrymandering: Favors one political party over another.
• Racial Gerrymandering: Favors one racial group over another.

Legal Context

• Voting Rights Act of 1965 required certain states to get federal approval for district changes.

Constitutional Principle

• Based on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
• Shaw's Argument: Districts violated the clause by being race-based.
• Reno's Argument: Districts aimed to help historically discriminated black residents.
• Justice Department's view: Constitution should not be colorblind; favor marginalized groups.

Court Decision

• Ruled against Reno and the Justice Department.
• Districts drawn solely on race are unconstitutional.
• Concern: Approval could lead to majority races creating similar gerrymandering.
• The court found the Equal Protection Clause was violated.

Significance

• Set a precedent for racial gerrymandering cases.
• Districts cannot be drawn with the sole intent of racial aggregation.
• Continues to be challenged but the decision stands.

Conclusion

• Shaw v. Reno remains a critical case in understanding racial gerrymandering and its limits under the Constitution.
• Relevant for future Supreme Court cases and district drawing procedures.