Citation network
Bartlett Vs. Strickland
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 09, 2009
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2008 Bartlett V. StricklandSearch
-
liability under Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
cases involving single-member districts. Growe v. EmisonSearch
-
a minority group composes a numerical, working majority of the voting-age population, see, e.g. , Voinovich v. QuilterSearch
-
outcome of an election even if its preferred candidate cannot be elected, see League of United Latin American Citizens v. PerrySearch
-
avoidance to steer clear of serious constitutional concerns under the Equal Protection Clause. See Clark v. MartinezSearch
-
their own method of complying with the Voting Rights Act, which may include drawing crossover districts. See Georgia v. AshcroftSearch
-
minority districts by statutory command, for that, too, could pose constitutional concerns. See , e.g., Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, adhered to his view in Holder v. HallSearch
-
any vote dilution claim, regardless of the size of the minority population in a given district. The Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., and Breyer, J., filed dissenting opinions. Bartlett v. StricklandSearch
-
Opinion of Kennedy, J. Bartlett V. StricklandSearch
-
No. 07-689 Gary Bartlett, Executive Director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, Et Al., Petitioners V. DwightSearch
-
the state courts and refer to both sections of the state constitution as the Whole County Provision. See Pender County v. BartlettSearch
-
the one-person, one-vote principle of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. See Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
s first two statewide redistricting plans. See Stephenson v. BartlettSearch
-
Stephenson v. BartlettSearch
-
In Mobile v. BoldenSearch
-
in Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
because a geographically compact minority group has been split between two or more single-member districts. Growe v. EmisonSearch
-
but has declined to decide the minimum size minority group necessary to satisfy the first requirement. See Voinovich v. QuilterSearch
-
but see Holder v. HallSearch
-
districts, in recognition of the necessary coalition between minority and crossover majority voters. See Georgia v. AshcroftSearch
-
s choice. See, e.g. , Nixon v. KentSearch
-
Hall v. VirginiaSearch
-
cf. Metts v. MurphySearch
-
Valdespino v. AlamoSearch
-
Cousin v. SundquistSearch
-
Sanchez v. ColoradoSearch
-
Romero v. PomonaSearch
-
McNeil v. SpringfieldSearch
-
see also Garza v. CountySearch
-
rule, we resolve that doubt by avoiding serious constitutional concerns under the Equal Protection Clause. See Clark v. MartinezSearch
-
Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
as a determinant when partisan considerations themselves may be suspect in the drawing of district lines. See Vieth v. JubelirerSearch
-
majority-minority districts by statutory command, for that, too, could pose constitutional concerns. See Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
crossover districts, that would raise serious questions under both the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. See Reno v. BossierSearch
-
been met. The judgment of the Supreme Court of North Carolina is affirmed. It is so ordered. Bartlett v. StricklandSearch
-
Scalia joins, concurring in the judgment. I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my opinion in Holder v. HallSearch
-
I continue to disagree, therefore, with the framework set forth in Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
Holder , supra , at 893. For these reasons, I concur only in the judgment. Bartlett v. StricklandSearch
-
Souter, J., Dissenting Bartlett V. StricklandSearch
-
see Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
see also League of United Latin American Citizens v. PerrySearch
-
the Equal Protection Clause. See Clark v. MartinezSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial