Richard Vieth, Norma Jean Vieth, and Susan Furey v. Robert C. Jubelirer, President of the Pennsylvania Senate, et al. (541 U.S. 267)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 28, 2004 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 541 U.S. 267 · 124 S. Ct. 1769
- Decided
- April 28, 2004
- Term
- October Term 2003
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Scalia
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Scalia announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which The Chief Justice, Justice O’Connor, and Justice Thomas join. Plaintiffs-appellants Richard Vieth, Norma Jean Vieth, and Susan Furey challenge a map drawn by the Pennsylvania General Assembly establishing districts for the election of congressional Representatives, on the ground that the dis-tricting constitutes an unconstitutional political gerrymander. In Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U. S. 109 (1986), this Court held that political gerrymandering claims are justiciable, but could not agree upon a standard to adjudicate them. The present appeal presents the questions whether our decision in Bandemer was in error, and, if not, what the standard should be. I The facts, as alleged by the plaintiffs, are as follows. The population figures derived from the 2000 census showed that Pennsylvania was entitled to only 19 Representatives in Congress, a decrease in 2 from the Commonwealth’s previous delegation. Pennsylvania’s General Assembly took up the task of drawing a new districting map. At the time, the Republican Party controlled a majority of both state Houses and held the Governor’s office. Prominent national figures in the Republican Party pressured the General Assembly to adopt a partisan redistricting plan as a punitive measure against Democrats for having enacted pro-Democrat redistricting plans…
Excerpt of a 43,220-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.