Vocabulary
What is a writ of certiorari?
An order by the Supreme Court to hear a case from a lower court.
What issue was at the center of Shaw v. Reno?
Racial gerrymandering.
What type of gerrymandering was challenged in Rucho v. Common Cause?
Partisan gerrymandering.
What do Shaw v. Reno and Rucho v. Common Cause both deal with?
Gerrymandering and voting districts
What is gerrymandering?
Redrawing district lines to favor a group or party.
What are amicus curiae briefs?
“Friend of the court” briefs filed by outside groups to give additional information or arguments.
Why did North Carolina redraw its congressional districts?
To create a majority-Black district and comply with the Voting Rights Act.
Which state’s districts were being challenged in this case?
North Carolina (also Maryland was involved in a related case).
Which amendment is important in both cases?
The 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause).
Why might states want to gerrymander districts?
To gain political advantage and win more seats.
What happens during oral arguments in the Supreme Court?
Lawyers present their case and answer questions from the justices.
What did the plaintiffs argue about the shape of the district?
That it was oddly shaped and drawn mainly based on race.
What was the main constitutional question in Rucho v. Common Cause?
Whether partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution.
How are racial and partisan gerrymandering similar?
Both involve manipulating district boundaries to benefit a specific group.
How can gerrymandering affect elections?
It can make elections less competitive and favor one party unfairly.
What is a dissenting opinion and why is it important?
An opinion written by justices who disagree with the majority; it shows opposing views and can influence future cases
What did the Supreme Court decide about racial gerrymandering in this case?
That districts drawn primarily based on race can violate the Equal Protection Clause.
What did the Supreme Court rule about partisan gerrymandering claims?
That they are nonjusticiable (not for federal courts to decide).
How are the Court’s approaches to these two types of gerrymandering different?
The Court limits racial gerrymandering but allows partisan gerrymandering to be handled by states.
What is one argument FOR allowing gerrymandering?
It’s a political process that should be handled by elected officials, not courts.
What does stare decisis mean, and how does it affect Supreme Court decisions?
It means “to stand by things decided,” so the Court follows precedent when making decisions.
How did the Court justify its reasoning under the Equal Protection Clause?
The Court said separating voters by race without strong justification is unconstitutional.
Why did the Court say federal courts could not decide partisan gerrymandering cases?
Because there are no clear legal standards to determine when it goes too far, making it a political question.
How do these cases show limits of the Supreme Court’s role in political issues?
They show the Court will step in for constitutional violations (race) but avoid political questions (party advantage).
Should the Supreme Court be involved in drawing district lines? Explain your reasoning.
Answers will vary, but should include reasoning about fairness, limits of courts, or role of government.