Wittman v. Personhuballah (578 U.S. 539)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 23, 2016 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 578 U.S. 539 · 136 S. Ct. 3353
- Decided
- May 23, 2016
- Term
- October Term 2015
- Vote
- 8–0
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Petition denied or appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. Ten Members of Congress from Virginia, intervenors in the District Court below, have appealed a judgment from a three-judge panel striking down a congressional redistricting plan applicable to the November 2016 election. We conclude that the intervenors now lack standing to pursue the appeal. And we consequently order the appeal dismissed. I This lawsuit began in October 2013, after the then-Governor of Virginia signed into law a new congressional redistricting plan (which we shall call the "Enacted Plan") designed to reflect the results of the 2010 census. Three voters from Congressional District 3 brought this lawsuit against the Commonwealth. They challenged the Enacted Plan on the ground that its redrawing of their district's lines was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The Members of Congress now before us intervened to help defend the Enacted Plan. After a bench trial, a divided three-judge District Court agreed with the voters. It concluded that the Commonwealth had used race as the predominant basis for modifying the boundaries of District 3. Page v. Virginia State Bd. of Elections, 58 F.Supp.3d 533, 550 (E.D.Va.2014). And it found that the Commonwealth's use of race, when scrutinized strictly, was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. Id., at 553. The Commonwealth of Virginia did not…
Excerpt of a 10,498-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.