About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 Robert Timothy Reagan, et al., Texas Redistricting in 2011 1 (2018)

handle is hein.congcourts/fjctxr0001 and id is 1 raw text is: CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION Texas Redistricting in 2011 Davis v. Perry (Orlando L. Garcia, W.D. Tex. 5:11-cv-788) On September 22, 2011, six days after a three-judge redistricting bench trial on legislative and congressional districts in Texas, voters filed a federal complaint alleging dilution of minority voting strength in their districts. The court ordered the defendants to re- spond by October 3, and the case was consolidated with a collection of cases already underway. Seven years after the litigation began, the Supreme Court approved districting plans that reflected the po- litical judgments of the state legislature as much as possible, modi- fied by the district court only as necessary to cure legal defects. Subject: District lines. Topics: Malapportionment; three-judge court; case assignment; section 2 discrimination; section 5 preclearance; intervention; attorney fees; removal; pro se party. On September 22, 2011, eight voters in four state senate districts filed in the Western District of Texas's San Antonio Division a federal complaint against state officials, alleging dilution of minority voting strength in their districts.' The court assigned the case to Judge Orlando L. Garcia as related to previ- ously filed districting challenges.2 On September 23, the circuit's chief judge appointed as a three-judge court to hear the case the judges presiding over Judge Garcia's related districting cases: Judge Garcia, District Judge Xavier Rodriguez, also in San Antonio, and Circuit Judge Jerry E. Smith, whose chambers are in Houston.' On September 28, the three-judge court ordered defendants to respond to the complaint by October 3. The first of the consolidated cases was filed in San Antonio on May 9 by two voters seeking judicial intervention in the redistricting of Texas's senate, house of representatives, and state board of education in light of the 2010 census.' The plaintiffs alleged that (1) instead of seeking districts with equal populations, Texas was aiming for disparities of no more than 10% and (2) Texas was improperly regarding prisoners as residents of their rural counties of incarceration, thereby diluting the voting strength of urban resi- dents.6 The three-judge court was appointed on May 1 1.' On May 31, the 1. Complaint, Davis v. Perry, No. 5:11-cv-788 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 22, 2011), D.E. 1; Davis v. Abbott, 781 F.3d 207, 209-10 (5th Cir. 2015). 2. Docket Sheet, Davis, No. 5:11-cv-788 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 22, 2011); see Abbott v. Perez, 585 U.S. _, _, 138 S. Ct. 2305, 2315 (2018). See generally Ari Berman, Give Us the Ballot 267-68, 298-99 (2015). 3. Order, Davis, No. 5:11-cv-788 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 23, 2011), D.E. 4. 4. Order, id. (Sept. 28, 2011), D.E. 7. 5. Complaint, Perez v. Texas, No. 5:1 1-cv-360 (W.D. Tex. May 9, 2011), D.E. 1. 6. Id. 7. Order, id. (May 11, 2011), D.E. 4; see 28 U.S.C. § 2284(a) (2014) (A district court of three judges shall be convened ... when an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of Federal Judicial Center 7/13/2018 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most