From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...
Thornburg v. Gingles
United States Supreme Court
478 U.S. 30 (1986)
Facts
North Carolina engaged in multimember redistricting. Seven districts came under controversy for alleged racially polarized vote dilution. Until 1982, African Americans experienced minimal electoral success in North Carolina. Of the seven districts, District 23, which regularly elected African Americans, served as the sole exception. African American voters in North Carolina overwhelmingly favored a single party. Moreover, this racial minority tended to be regionally concentrated. A particular socioeconomic experience and shared history helped determine this group's electoral access. The district court ruled that the seven North Carolina districts in question diluted African American votes. Thus, North Carolina's multimember redistricting failed to conform to § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Court heard this appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brennan, J.)
Concurrence (O'Connor, J.)
Concurrence (White, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
