Which case established that no racial gerrymandering is allowed and that race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing boundaries?

Which case established that no racial gerrymandering is allowed and that race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing boundaries?

• A. Shaw v. Reno (1993)
• B. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
• C. Katz v. United States (1967)
• D. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Answer: (A)

Racial gerrymandering and how the Equal Protection Clause applies to drawing electoral boundaries are being tested here. Shaw v. Reno established that race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing congressional districts. The Court said that when a plan uses race as the main criterion for creating districts, it triggers strict scrutiny and is subject to being struck down unless it is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest. Even with good intentions, such as protecting minority voting power under the Voting Rights Act, the means cannot rely primarily on race and must instead rely on neutral, nonracial factors like contiguity, compactness, and respect for communities of interest. This case makes clear that you can challenge district maps on the grounds that they are racially gerrymandered, because using race as the deciding factor violates equal protection. Other listed cases involve different constitutional issues (right to counsel, privacy protections, or segregation), so they do not address redistricting rules.

Racial gerrymandering and how the Equal Protection Clause applies to drawing electoral boundaries are being tested here. Shaw v. Reno established that race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing congressional districts. The Court said that when a plan uses race as the main criterion for creating districts, it triggers strict scrutiny and is subject to being struck down unless it is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest. Even with good intentions, such as protecting minority voting power under the Voting Rights Act, the means cannot rely primarily on race and must instead rely on neutral, nonracial factors like contiguity, compactness, and respect for communities of interest. This case makes clear that you can challenge district maps on the grounds that they are racially gerrymandered, because using race as the deciding factor violates equal protection. Other listed cases involve different constitutional issues (right to counsel, privacy protections, or segregation), so they do not address redistricting rules.