Harman Patil (Editor)

Davis v. Bandemer

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Concurrence
  
Burger

End date
  
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

Majority
  
White (part II), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens

Plurality
  
White (parts I, III, IV), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun

Similar
  
Shaw v Reno, Wesberry v Sanders, Baker v Carr, Miller v Johnson, Reynolds v Sims

Davis v bandemer


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.

Contents

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

Background

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."

References

Davis v. Bandemer Wikipedia