Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
99 <br /> ". The Third Districting Plan, 1997 <br /> 12 <br /> 5 \ <br /> 1 <br /> 11 6 4 2 <br /> 3 <br /> 9 <br /> 7 <br /> Map 4. The Fourth Districting Plan, 1998 <br /> 5 <br /> 1 <br /> 11 12 11 6 4 2 <br /> 3 <br /> 9 <br /> There has been continuing controversy over the North Carolina <br /> General Assembly's efforts to create one or more congressional Source:1991 and 1992 maps adapted <br /> districts with African-American majorities. The result has been 7 from maps in Popular Government archives; <br /> 1997 and 1998 maps adapted from maps <br /> the drawing of four different maps in the 1990s.Districts 1 and available at vvvvvv.ncga.state.nc.us/ <br /> 12 have been the focus of much of the attention. Red istricting/Dist_Plans/distplanshome.htmI <br /> ing district lines may in fact constitute a sembly did so(its fourth 1990s plan—see (districts in which a minority group is <br /> violation of the Equal Protection Clause map 4),but it appealed the order striking the majority) will be considered as <br /> of the Fourteenth Amendment,especial- down the 1997 plan.The Supreme Court strong evidence of unlawful considera- <br /> ly when, to achieve African-American sent the matter back to the federal district tion of race.As the Supreme Court said, <br /> majority districts,the shape of the dis- court to consider again,and in early 2000 <br /> tricts must be drawn very oddly. the district court once more declared it [W]e believe that reapportionment <br /> The matter came back to the Supreme unconstitutional.The state appealed,and is one area in which appearances <br /> Court in 1996,and in Shaw v.Hunt,40 the in April 2001 the Supreme Court found do matter. A reapportionment <br /> Court held that the districting plan did in the plan constitutional,holding that polit- plan that includes in one district <br /> fact violate the Equal Protection Clause. ical considerations,not race,were domi- individuals who belong to the <br /> As a result,in 1997 the General Assembly nant in drawing the plan. same race, but who are otherwise <br /> adopted yet another plan(its third),with widely separated by geographical <br /> one majority African-American district, What do the Shaw decisions mean and political boundaries,and who <br /> district 1,and one district nearly evenly for you in drawing districts? may have little in common with <br /> split but majority white, district 12 (see The Shaw decisions mean at least two one another but the color of their <br /> Map 3). The Justice Department ap- things. First, there is a violation of the skin, bears an uncomfortable re- <br /> proved the new plan,but in early 1998 a Equal Protection Clause if a board, in semblance to political apartheid.42 <br /> federal district court struck it down as drawing the district lines,makes race the <br /> violating the Equal Protection Clause and "dominant and controlling" considera- What do you do? <br /> ordered the General Assembly to redraw tion.41 Second,the creation of very oddly The task for cities,counties,and school <br /> the lines once again. The General As- shaped "majority-minority districts" systems in areas with sizeable minority <br /> POPULAR GOVERNMENT SPRING ZOOI 13 <br />