Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899, 53 (1996)

Page:   Index   Previous  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53

Cite as: 517 U. S. 899 (1996)

Souter, J., dissenting

countenance the suggestion that a State may draw unsightly lines to favor farmers or city dwellers, but not to create districts that benefit the very group whose history inspired the Amendment that the Voting Rights Act was designed to implement.

Because I have no hesitation in concluding that North Carolina's decision to adopt a plan in which white voters were in the majority in only 10 of the State's 12 districts did not violate the Equal Protection Clause, I respectfully dissent.

Justice Souter, with whom Justice Ginsburg and Justice Breyer join, dissenting.

My views on this case are substantially expressed in my dissent to Bush v. Vera, post, p. 952.

951

Page:   Index   Previous  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53

Last modified: October 4, 2007