Shaw v. Reno: Supreme Court Case Overview

Introduction

Focus on Shaw v. Reno, a required Supreme Court case in the AP Government curriculum.
Emphasis on gerrymandering, specifically racial gerrymandering.

1990 Context:
- North Carolina had no black representatives despite having a 20% black population.
- After the 1990 census, North Carolina drew a majority black district and sought Justice Department approval.
- Justice Department suggested creating a second majority black district.
Gerrymandering Definition:
- Drawing congressional districts to favor one group over another.
- Partisan Gerrymandering: favors one political party.
- Racial Gerrymandering: favors one racial group.

Voting Rights Act of 1965: Required certain states to get federal approval for district changes.
Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment:
- Shaw's Argument: Districts drawn with race in mind, violating the clause.
- Reno's Argument: Districts aimed to help historically marginalized black residents, thus did not violate the clause.
- Justice Department: Supports districts drawn to support marginalized groups for equity.

Ruled against Reno and the Justice Department.
Reason:
- Districts drawn solely on race are unconstitutional.
- Sets a dangerous precedent for major racial groups to misuse gerrymandering.
- Confirmed violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Precedent:
- Shaw v. Reno set a precedent against racial gerrymandering.
- Districts cannot be drawn with the sole intent to group voters by race.
- Continues to be challenged but the decision remains upheld.

Shaw v. Reno remains a significant case in the context of electoral law and the equal protection clause.
Important for understanding limitations and regulations regarding gerrymandering.

For additional resources and videos about Supreme Court cases, review packets, and exam preparation, consider exploring further educational materials.
Subscribe for more educational content.