David Baird v. The Consolidated City of Indianapolis

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• assuming that plaintiffs can prove the three Gingles preconditions 8 before considering as part of the totality of the circumstances whether electoral losses had 9 10 more to do with party than with race
• \A balanced bottom line does not foreclose proof of discrimination along the way\
• “A balanced bottom line does not foreclose proof of discrimination along the way”
• “Any approach that depends on outcomes supposes the need to consider multiple electoral contests — the same position over many years, many positions during the same year, or both.”
• “[T]he electoral process ensures equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).