Bartlett v. Strickland
Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case in which a plurality of the Court held that a minority group must constitute a numerical majority of the voting-age population in an area before section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires the creation of a legislative district to prevent dilution of that group's votes.
| Bartlett v. Strickland | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 14, 2008 Decided March 9, 2009 | |
| Full case name | Gary Bartlett, Executive Director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, et al., Petitioners v. Dwight Strickland, et al. |
| Citations | 556 U.S. 1 (more) 129 S. Ct. 1231; 173 L. Ed. 2d 173; 2009 U.S. LEXIS 1842 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina |
| Holding | |
| A minority group must constitute a numerical majority of the voting-age population in an area before section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires the creation of a legislative district to prevent dilution of that group’s votes. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Plurality | Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Alito |
| Concurrence | Thomas, joined by Scalia |
| Dissent | Souter, joined by Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Dissent | Ginsburg |
| Dissent | Breyer |
| Laws applied | |
| Voting Rights Act § 2 | |
The decision struck down a North Carolina redistricting plan that attempted to preserve minority voting power in a 39% black North Carolina House of Representatives district.
Justice Kennedy delivered the decision and was joined by Justices Alito and Roberts. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion that was joined by Justice Scalia. Justice Souter filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer. Justices Ginsburg and Breyer also filed separate dissenting opinions.
External links
- Text of Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion)
