Embedded Files
The two majority-minority districts of North Carolina.
Image courtesy GBH
Balancing equity and equal protection.
Balancing equity and equal protection.
A 1965 civil rights and representation mandate on previously segregated states.
A constitutional question of when prioritizing the voice of a group is eerily similar to exclusion.
When a group of five white North Carolina voters, led by Ruth Shaw, sued the federal government for their mandate on inclusive districts, well-intentioned racial gerrymandering and its reception in the Supreme Court would change American districting laws forever.
North Carolina had to reckon with a decades-old act and a mandate for representation.
North Carolina had to reckon with a decades-old act and a mandate for representation.
The 1965 Voting Rights Act, passed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, aimed to substantially increase minority voter representation. This act banned literacy tests and other methods used to exclude minority voters, and also mandated the creation of Majority-Minority districts by banning the dilution of minority voices.
Majority-Minority Districts, established by the VRA, required that more than half of a given district must be a linguistic or ethnic minority. This ensures that the voices of a minority are not drowned out by that of the majority.
The nine justices of the Supreme Court in 1993.
Learning Resources
Learning Resources
What is Gerrymandering?
What is Gerrymandering?
Gerrymandering is the redrawing of voting districts. It began with good intentions– to ensure that each district has about the same population size. However, this seemingly innocent process was first twisted in 1812 in Massachusetts to favor the democratic-republican party by Governor Elbridge Gerry, who signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts into an odd, salamander-like shape: giving us the term Gerrymandering.
Let's take a look at this town of 50 voters. Let's say there are five seats being voted for in this region. In the first graphic, 40% vote yellow, and 60% vote blue. With no districting at all, yellow wins 40% of the seats, or two, and blue wins 60% of the seats, or three. Blue voters have more representation, because they have a larger population. If we divide this area into even districts, 5 districts vote blue, and 0 are yellow. Blue wins all five seats, and the 20 yellow voters have no say in their representation despite making up almost half of the population.
Through aggressive gerrymandering, this county stil has five districts, but this time 3 yellow and 2 blue. Despite being a smaller population, yellow voters are now overrepresented in government. This illustrates just how impactful gerrymandering can be when trying to change the will of the people. When we see the bizarre shape of North Carolina’s District number 12, remember the complex mechanics that make gerrymandering possible.
How do we build fair districts?
How do we build fair districts?
If demographics were cleanly divided like the graphic above, even vertical columns would be the most equitable, and closest to the precinct model. However, in the real world, people are spread unevenly across geographic areas, regardless of demographic or political leaning. This is why gerrymandering usually manifests as wild-looking districts: the easiest way to ensure that a district has the same leaning or demographic is to simply draw a line tightly around them. Legislators should instead aim for proportionality, by making sure that the percentage of seats match the percentage of each party or demographic's vote.
This case is part of our Racial Equity narrative. Read about more of our Racial Equity features below!
Further Reading
Further Reading
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse