Supreme Court· 6/13/1996

Shaw v. Hunt

Citations

517 U.S. 899

How courts have described this case

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

holding that an earlier version of the Twelfth District, which appeared to have been drawn to “assure black voter majorities,” was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander
concluding that the North Carolina “General Assembly” adequately “explained why it did not create a second minority district,” id. at 912
holding that a plaintiff lacks standing to challenge legislation created outside of plaintiffs district absent specific evidence of personal harm
concluding that registered voters and residents of a district subject to a racial-gerrymandering claim had standing to seek prospective relief
holding that “the institution that makes the racial distinction must have had a strong basis in evidence to conclude that remedial action was necessary, before it embarks on an affirmative-action program.”
holding that “the institution that makes the racial distinction must have had a strong basis in evidence to conclude that remedial action was necessary, before it embarks on an affirmative-action program.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Breyer, Con, Ginsburg, III, Kennedy, Nor, Parts, Rehnquist, Scalxa, Souter, Stevens, Thomas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

202 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

43 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Shaw v. Hunt

10 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.