Perdue v. Baker
Georgia Supreme Court
586 S.E.2d 606, 277 Ga. 1 (2003)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
The Georgia general assembly enacted a bill reapportioning the state’s senate districts following the 2000 census. After Governor Roy Barnes signed the bill into law, the state sought preclearance of the redistricting plan in district court as required by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). The district court found that the state’s redistricting plan did not meet the VRA’s requirements. In June 2002, the general assembly enacted Act 444, a second redistricting plan, and made the new redistricting plan’s enactment expressly conditional on a final determination of the first redistricting plan. In July 2002, Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker (defendant) appealed the district court’s denial of the first redistricting plan directly to the United States Supreme Court. Shortly after taking office, Governor Sonny Perdue (plaintiff) requested that Baker dismiss the appeal of the first redistricting plan pending before the Supreme Court. After Baker refused Perdue’s request, Perdue filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to force Baker to withdraw the appeal. The district court denied Perdue’s petition, and Perdue appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fletcher, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
