Davis v. Bandemer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Davis v. Bandemer
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued October 7, 1985
Decided June 30, 1986
Full case name Davis, et al. v. Bandemer, et al.
Citations 478 U.S. 109 (more)
106 S. Ct. 2797; 92 L. Ed. 2d 85; 1986 U.S. LEXIS 122; 54 U.S.L.W. 4898
Prior history Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Holding
Claims of partisan gerrymandering were justiciable, but failed to agree on a clear standard for judicial review of those claims. The decision was later limited with respect to many of the elements directly involving issues of redistricting and political gerrymandering, but was somewhat broadened with respect to less significant ancillary procedural issues.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
Majority White (part II), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens
Plurality White (parts I, III, IV), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun
Concurrence Burger
Concurrence O'Connor, joined by Burger, Rehnquist
Concur/dissent Powell, joined by Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U.S. 109 (1986), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that claims of partisan gerrymandering were justiciable, but failed to agree on a clear standard for the judicial review of the class of claims of a political nature to which such cases belong. The decision was later limited with respect to many of the elements directly involving issues of redistricting and political gerrymandering, but was somewhat broadened with respect to less significant ancillary procedural issues.

The National Republican Committee filed an amicus brief in support of the Indiana Democrats,[1] Democrats in the California house and senate filed briefs supporting the Republican redistricting plan.[2]

Background[edit]

Democrats in the state of Indiana challenged the state's 1981 state apportionment scheme for Indiana General Assembly districts because of political gerrymandering. The Democrats argued that "the apportionment unconstitutionally diluted their votes in important districts, violating their rights."[3]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Brief Amicus Curiae of the Republican National Committee in Support of Appellees, Susan J. DAVIS, et al., Appellants, v. Irwin C. BANDEMER, et al., Appellees., 1985 (U.S.), 1.
  2. ^ Brief Amicus Curiae of Assembly of the State of California in Support of Appellants, Susan J. DAVIS, et al., Appellants, v. Irwin C. BANDEMER, et al., Appellees., 1985 (U.S.).
  3. ^ "Davis v. Bandemer 478 U.S. 109 (1986)". Oyez: Chicago-Kent College of Law. Retrieved 10 January 2014. 

Further reading[edit]