Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952, 112 (1996)

Page:   Index   Previous  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  118  119  Next

984

BUSH v. VERA

Opinion of O'Connor, J.

Shaw I that because districts created with a view to satisfying § 2 do not involve "racial subjugation," post, at 1055, and may in a sense be " 'benign[ly]' " motivated, Shaw I, 509 U. S., at 685 (Souter, J., dissenting), strict scrutiny should not apply to them. We rejected that argument in Shaw I, and we reject it now. As we explained then, see id., at 653, we subject racial classifications to strict scrutiny precisely because that scrutiny is necessary to determine whether they are benign—as Justice Stevens' hypothetical of a targeted outreach program to protect victims of sickle cell anemia, see post, at 1032, would, no doubt, be—or whether they misuse race and foster harmful and divisive stereotypes without a compelling justification. We see no need to revisit our prior debates.

Both dissents contend that the recognition of the Shaw I cause of action threatens public respect for, and the independence of, the Federal Judiciary by inserting the courts deep into the districting process. We believe that the dissents both exaggerate the dangers involved, and fail to recognize the implications of their suggested retreat from Shaw I.

As to the dangers of judicial entanglement, Justice Stevens' dissent makes much of cases stemming from state districting plans originally drawn up before Shaw I, in which problems have arisen from the uncertainty in the law prior to and during its gradual clarification in Shaw I, Miller, and today's cases. See post, at 1037-1038 (Stevens, J., dissenting). We are aware of the difficulties faced by the States, and by the district courts, in confronting new constitutional precedents, and we also know that the nature of the expressive harms with which we are dealing, and the complexity of the districting process, are such that bright-line rules are not available. But we believe that today's decisions, which both illustrate the defects that offend the principles of Shaw I and reemphasize the importance of the States' discretion in the redistricting process, see supra, at 978-979, will serve

Page:   Index   Previous  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  118  119  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007