Rick Perry, Governor of Texas, et al., Appellants v. Shannon Perez et al. (565 U.S. 388)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 20, 2012 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 565 U.S. 388 · 132 S. Ct. 934
- Decided
- January 20, 2012
- Term
- October Term 2011
- Vote
- 9–0
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. The 2010 census showed an enormous increase in Texas’ population, with over four million new residents. That growth required the State to redraw its electoral districts for the United States Congress, the State Senate, and the State House of Representatives, in order to comply with the Constitution’s one-person, one-vote rule. See Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U. S. 461, 488, n. 2 (2003). The State also had to create new districts for the four additional congressional seats it received. Texas is a “covered jurisdiction” under § 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. See 79 Stat. 439, 42 U. S. C. § 1973c(a); 28 CFR pt. 51, App. (2011). Section 5 suspends all changes to a covered jurisdiction’s election procedures, including district lines, until those changes are submitted to and approved by a three-judge United States District Court for the District of Columbia, or the Attorney General. See Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193, 198 (2009). This process, known as preclearance, requires the covered jurisdiction to demonstrate that its proposed change “neither has the purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color.” §1973c(a). This Court has been emphatic that a new electoral map cannot be used to conduct an election until it has been precleared. See, e. g., Clark v. Roemer, 500 U. S.…
Excerpt of a 18,510-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.