Shaw v Reno

Question 1

Facts of case

Answer 1

The U.S. Attorney General rejected a North Carolina congressional reapportionment plan. The plan created only one black-majority district. North Carolina submitted a 2nd plan creating 2 black-majority districts. 5 North Carolina residents challenged the constitutionality of this unusually shaped district, alleging that its only purpose was to secure the election of additional black representatives.

Question 2

Holdings and rationale

Answer 2

The Court held that although North Carolina’s reapportionment plan was racially neutral. The resulting district shape was crazy enough to suggest that it constituted an effort to separate voters into different districts based on race.

Question 3

Keywords

Answer 3

In 1993, Under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, majority-minority districts created under
the Voting Rights Act of 1965, may be constitutionally challenged by voters if race is the only factor used
in creating the district.