Upham v. Seamon

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that federal courts must defer to the legislative preferences absent a finding of a constitutional or statutory violation
• noting that “[ajlthough a court must defer to legislative judgments on reapportionment as much as possible, it is forbidden to do so when the legislative plan would not meet the special standards of population equality and racial fairness that are applicable to court-ordered plans”
• permitting adjustments to boundaries only to the extent necessary to remedy violation
• the court-imposed remedy is limited to those modifications of the current plan that are necessary to- cure any statutory defect
• “In fashioning a reapportionment plan or choosing among plans, a district court should not preempt the legislative task nor ‘intrude upon state policy any more than necessary.’ ” (Citation omitted.)
• “[W]e have authorized District Courts to order or to permit elections to be held pursuant to apportionment plans that do not in all respects measure up to the legal requirements, even constitutional requirements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).