Cite as: 522 U. S. 34 (1997)
Breyer, J., dissenting
Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Souter joins, dissenting.
City of Rome v. United States, 446 U. S. 156 (1980), focused upon a change in Rome, Georgia's, method of electing city officials—a change from "first-past-the-post" (plurality wins) to "run-off" (majority needed to win). The change took place in 1966. The change was of a kind that could have made it more difficult for newly enfranchised black voters to elect a mayor (e. g., where the black population of a town amounted, say, to 35% of all voters). The change had not been precleared, though § 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 1973c, required preclearance. In 1968, however, Georgia had precleared a different change in its law. Georgia had submitted, and the Attorney General had precleared, a comprehensive Municipal Election Code that provided, in relevant part:
"If the municipal charter . . . provides that a candidate may be nominated or elected by a plurality of the votes cast . . . , such provision shall prevail. Otherwise, no candidate shall be . . . elected to public office in any election unless such candidate shall have received a majority of the votes cast . . . ." Georgia Municipal Election Code, § 34A-1407(a), 1968 Ga. Laws 977, as amended, Ga. Code Ann. § 21-3-407(a) (1993).
Rome argued that the Attorney General's preclearance of this 1968 change in effect precleared the plurality-to-majority change that Rome had made two years earlier. The Court rejected Rome's argument.
The case before us now involves another Georgia city, the city of Monroe. Monroe, like Rome, made a change in its system for electing city officials—a change from "first-past-the-post" (plurality wins) to "run-off" (majority needed to win). Monroe, like Rome, made the change in 1966. And, Monroe's change, like Rome's change, was not precleared. Monroe, like Rome, argues that the Attorney General's pre-
45
Page: Index Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007