CASE SUMMARY
In 2015, a group of plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit against the North Carolina State Board of Elections and various state officials, challenging several of North Carolina's legislative districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders in violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiffs alleged that when the General Assembly drew its 2011 legislative plans, it had done so with two race-based policies in mind: (1) a policy of racial proportionality for both the Senate and House plans and (2) a policy that each district drawn to achieve racial proportionality should have a black voting age population (BVAP) of at least 50%, and this predominant use of race was done without compelling justification or narrow tailoring as is constitutionally required. They sought a declaration that the challenged districts were invalid and an injunction prohibiting the Defendants from calling, holding, or taking any action with respect to elections for the North Carolina General Assembly based on those districts.
On August 11, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the defendants failed to establish that each of the challenged districts was supported by a strong basis in evidence and narrowly tailored to comply with either Section 2 or Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Therefore, the challenged districts were held to be unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The district court issued a final remedial order on November 29, 2016 that required the General Assembly to create a remedial legislative map for house districts by March 15, 2017, and to conduct a special election in the fall of 2017 using the new districts. The defendants appealed the district court's ruling and remedial order to the U.S. Supreme Court, and sought a stay of the district court's remedial order pending resolution of the appeal. The Supreme Court granted the defendants' application for a stay on January 10, 2017. On June 5, 2017, the Supreme Court summarily affirmed the district court's judgment that the 2011 plans were racial gerrymanders in violation of the plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment rights, but vacated its remedial order requiring a mid-cycle election and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to conduct a "careful case-specific analysis" to determine an appropriate remedy.
On August 31, 2017, the General Assembly enacted new legislative plans to be implemented for the 2018 elections, but plaintiffs objected to 12 of those remedial districts as being racial gerrymanders still or otherwise legally unacceptable. The district court agreed that nine of the districts were not acceptable, and appointed a Special Master to analyze the 2011 and 2017 plans and to create recommended plans, which were filed on December 1, 2017. On January 19, 2018, the district court rejected the plaintiffs' proposed maps and approved the General Assembly's 2017 plans, as modified by the Special Master's recommended plans, which were adopted. On January 26, 2018, the district court rejected the Legislative Defendants' motion to stay the remedial redistricting plan from taking effect, which the defendants appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
On June 28, 2018, the Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's remedial map order, finding that its decision to override the legislature's remedial map was proper as to those districts which not been cured of the racial gerrymandering violations, but not as to those districts which were rejected on grounds other than racial gerrymandering because the district court lacked remedial authority over them.
CASE LIBRARY
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina - No. 1:15-CV-00399
- Complaint - 5/19/15
- Summons - 5/22/15
- First Amended Complaint - 7/24/15
- Defendants' Answer to First Amended Complaint - 8/14/15
- Order Appointing Three-Judge Panel - 8/19/15
- Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction - 10/7/15
- Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction - 10/21/15
- First Joint Stipulation - 11/5/15
- Defendants' Motion to Stay, Defer, or Abstain - 11/9/15
- Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion to Stay, Defer, or Abstain - 11/9/15
- Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Stay, Defer, or Abstain - 11/17/15
- Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction - 11/18/15
- Order Denying Motion for Preliminary Injunction - 11/25/15
- Plaintiffs' Motion to Enforce Scheduling Order - 1/27/16
- Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Motion to Enforce Scheduling Order - 1/27/16
- Plaintiffs' Motion to Expedite - 1/27/16
- Order - 1/28/16
- Defendants' Motion to Expedite - 2/5/16
- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in Support of Motion to Enforce Scheduling Order - 2/8/16
- Order - 2/10/16
- Order Granting Motion to Enforce Scheduling Order - 2/10/16
- Defendants' Motion for Leave to Depose Counsel for Plaintiffs - 2/10/16
- Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion for Leave to Depose Counsel for Plaintiffs - 2/10/16
- Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Motion for Leave to Depose Counsel for Plaintiffs - 2/17/16
- Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to Depose Counsel for Plaintiffs - 2/18/16
- Defendants' Motion to Modify Scheduling Order and to Expedite - 2/24/16
- Defendants' Memorandum in Support of Motion for Leave to Modify Scheduling Order and to Expedite - 2/24/16
- Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order - 3/2/16
- Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to Modify Scheduling Order - 3/4/16
- Defendants' Final Pretrial Disclosures - 3/14/16
- Plaintiffs' Trial Witness List - 3/14/16
- Plaintiffs' Identification of Trial Exhibits - 3/14/16
- Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony by Sean Trende - 3/21/16
- Plaintiffs' Brief in Support of Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony by Sean Trende - 3/21/16
- Parties' Second Joint Stipulation - 3/21/16
- Defendants' Trial Brief - 3/21/16
- Plaintiffs' Trial Brief - 3/21/16
- Plaintiffs' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law - 3/28/16
- Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law - 3/28/16
- Parties' Third joint Stipulation - 3/30/16
- Defendants' Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Testimony by Sean Trende - 4/6/16
- Defendants' Motion in Limine - 4/6/16
- Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion in Limine - 4/6/16
- Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion in Limine - 4/7/16
- Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Scott Falmlen Testimony - 4/10/16
- Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion in Limine to Exclude Scott Falmlen Testimony - 4/10/16
- Non-Party Scott Falmlen's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum - 4/14/16
- Non-Party Scott Falmlen's Memorandum in Support of Motion to Quash - 4/14/16
- Declaration of Scott Falmlen - 4/14/16
- Plaintiffs' Post-Trial Revised Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law - 5/6/16
- Plaintiffs' Post-Trial Brief - 5/6/16
- Plaintiffs' Post-Trial Briefing on Remedy - 5/6/16
- Defendants' Post Trial Brief on Burden of Proof and Narrow Tailoring - 5/6/16
- Defendants' Brief on Scheduling Issues for a Third Primary - 5/6/16
- Defendants' Post-Trial Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law - 5/6/16
- Memorandum Opinion - 8/11/16
- Order for Supplementary Briefing Schedule - 8/15/16
- District Court's Order and Judgment - 8/15/16
- Defendants' Report on the Time Requested by the General Assembly to Enact New Legislative Plans - 9/9/16
- Plaintiffs' Report Regarding Remedies - 9/9/16
- Defendants' Notice of Appeal - 9/13/16
- Plaintiffs' Motion for Additional Relief - 9/30/16
- Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Additional Relief - 9/30/16
- Defendants' Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Additional Relief - 10/28/16
- Corrected Declaration of Dr. Thomas Hofeller - 10/31/16
- Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Memorandum on Additional Relief - 11/15/16
- Order - 11/29/16
- Defendants' Emergency Motion to Stay Remedial Order Pending Disposition of Jurisdictional Statement - 12/2/16
- Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Emergency Motion to Stay Remedial Order Pending Disposition of Jurisdictional Statement - 12/23/16
- Defendants' Reply Brief in Support of Emergency Motion to Stay Remedial Order - 12/23/16
- Opinion and Order - 1/4/17
U.S. Supreme Court - No. 16-649 (Merits Appeal)
- Jurisdictional Statement - 11/14/16
- Appellees' Motion to Affirm - 12/16/16
- Appellants' Brief Opposing Motion to Affirm - 12/30/16
- Appellants' Supplemental Brief - 5/24/17
- Appellees' Response to Appellants' Supplemental Brief - 5/31/17
U.S. Supreme Court - No. 16A646 (Stay of Remedial Order); No. 16-1023 (Appeal of Remedial Order)
- Jurisdictional Statement - 2/21/17
- Appellees' Motion to Affirm - 2/28/17
- Appellants' Brief Opposing Motion to Affirm - 3/14/17
- Appellants' Supplemental Brief - 5/24/17
- Appellees' Response to Appellants' Supplemental Brief - 5/31/17
- Per Curiam Opinion - 6/5/17
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina - No. 1:15-CV-00399 (on remand)
- Plaintiffs' Motion to Set Deadlines for Remedial Plan - 6/8/17
- Plaintiffs' Motion for Expedited Evidentiary Hearing - 6/8/17
- Motion to Expedite Consideration of Plaintiffs' Motions - 6/8/17
- Notice by Court - 6/9/17
- Plaintiffs' Statement in Response to Court's Notice of June 9, 2017 - 6/15/17
- Notice by the Legislative Defendants - 6/26/17
- Legislative Defendants' Position Statement - 7/6/17
- Position Statement by the State of North Carolina and the State Board of Elections Defendants and Response to Plaintiffs' Motions - 7/6/17
- Legislative Defendants' Response to Position Statement by the North Carolina Attorney General on the Issue of Representation of the State - 7/10/17
- Brief of Amicus Curiae the North Carolina NAACP in Support of Plaintiffs - 7/11/17
- Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief on Remedies - 7/21/17
- Legislative Defendants' Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena - 7/25/17
- Legislative Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena - 7/25/17
- Plaintiffs' Response to Motion to Quash - 7/26/17
- Plaintiffs and Legislative Defendants' Joint Stipulation on Withdrawal of Subpoena and Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena - 7/26/17
- Order - 7/31/17
- Notice of Filing of New Legislative Districting Plans - 9/7/17
- Motion of Democracy North Carolina and League of Women Voters of North Carolina for Leave to File Amici Curiae Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Redistricting Plan and in Support of Plaintiffs - 9/15/17
- Memorandum in Support of Democracy North Carolina's and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina's Motion to File Amici Curiae Brief - 9/15/17
- Plaintiffs' Objections to Defendants' Remedial Districts and Memorandum of Law - 9/15/17
- Motion of the NC NAACP for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Objections to the Enacted Remedial Redistricting Plans - 9/15/17
- Memorandum of Law in Support of the NC NAACP's Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief - 9/15/17
- Memorandum Opinion - 9/19/17
- Legislative Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Objections - 9/22/17
- Order - 10/3/17
- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief on Scope of Review at the Remedy Stage - 10/10/17
- Order Requesting Submissions for Special Master - 10/12/17
- Order Proposing Professor Nathaniel Persily as Special Master - 10/26/17
- Affidavit of Nathaniel Persily, J.D., PH.D. - 10/27/17
- Legislative Defendants' Opposition to Appointment of Nathaniel Persily as Special Master - 10/30/17
- Plaintiffs' Response to Legislative Defendants' Opposition to Appointment of Nathaniel Persily as Special Master - 10/31/17
- Order Appointing Special Master to Draw Remedial Districts - 11/1/17
- Special Master's Draft Plan and Order - 11/13/17
- Special Master's Corrected Draft Plan and Order - 11/14/17
- Legislative Defendants' Response to Special Master's Draft Report - 11/17/17
- Plaintiffs' Response and Proposed Modifications to the Special Master's Draft Plan - 11/17/17
- Plaintiffs' Response to Legislative Defendants' November 17, 2017 Filing - 11/21/17
- Legislative Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Proposed Modifications to Special Master's Draft Plan - 11/21/17
- Special Master's Recommended Plan and Report - 12/1/17
- Special Master's Plan Stat Pack - 12/1/17
- Plaintiffs' Position on the Special Master's Recommended Plan - 12/8/17
- Legislative Defendants' Response to Special Master's Recommended Plan and Report - 12/8/17
- Legislative Defendants' Motion to Expedite Ruling on Plaintiffs' Objections - 12/11/17
- Legislative Defendants' Brief in Support of Motion to Expedite Ruling on Plaintiffs' Objections - 12/11/17
- Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Objections to Special Master's Recommended Plan - 12/13/17
- Legislative Defendants' Reply in Support of Objections to Special Master's Recommended Plan and Report - 12/15/17
- Legislative Defendants' Motion to Present Witnesses - 12/15/17
- Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion to Present Witnesses - 12/18/17
- Per Curiam Order - 12/21/17
- Legislative Defendants' Notice of Filing Expert Report of Douglas Johnson, Ph.D - 12/27/17
- Legislative Defendants' Proposed Questions to the Special Master - 12/27/17
- Plaintiffs' Proposed Questions for the Special Master - 12/27/17
- Order - 1/3/18
- Special Master's Recommended Plan for the North Carolina Senate and House of Representatives Hearing Presentation - 1/5/18
- Memorandum Opinion and Order (Amended) - 1/21/18
- Legislative Defendants' Emergency Motion to Stay Pending Supreme Court Review and Request for Expedited Ruling - 1/21/18
- Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Legislative Defendants' Emergency Motion to Stay Pending Supreme Court Review and Request for Expedited Ruling - 1/23/18
- State Defendants' Response to Legislative Defendants' Emergency Motion to Stay Pending Supreme Court Review and Request for Expedited Ruling - 1/23/18
- Memorandum Order Denying Motion to Stay - 1/26/18
U.S. Supreme Court - No. 17A790; No. 17-1364
- Jurisdictional Statement - 3/26/18
- Appellees' Motion to Affirm - 4/27/18
- Appellants' Brief Opposing Motion to Affirm - 5/15/18
- Per Curiam Opinion - 6/28/18