Court limits minority 'dilution' districts

WASHINGTON, March 9 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court Monday limited what legislatures can do to satisfy federal civil rights law, which bans dilution of black voter strength.

The high court ruled 5-4 that new legislative districts with fewer than 50 percent black voters could not be a remedy under federal law to correct the dilution of black voting strength.

That means black voters, particularly in the South, could be packed into black majority districts rather than spread across districts in a way that maximizes their voting influence.

The complicated ruling came in an opinion signed only by three of the five-member conservative justices, backed up by a separate concurring opinion signed by the other two conservatives.

The court's four-member liberal bloc dissented.

The case came out of North Carolina, where the state Constitution bans the General Assembly from dividing counties when drawing up legislative districts. Despite the ban, the legislators drew up House District 18, which included portions of four counties, to satisfy section 2 of the 1965 Civil Rights Act, which guards against minority vote dilution.

Black voters eventually fell below 50 percent in the new district and it was redrawn in 2003. But instead of keeping a county whole, the legislators divided it, keeping the district under 40 percent black. The reasoning was that black voters could still join with some white voters to elect the candidates of their choice, satisfying the federal ban against minority vote dilution.

However, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that only a majority black district would satisfy federal law, ordering a new redistricting, and Monday a U.S. Supreme Court plurality agreed.

The two justices agreeing with the judgment, but not the reasoning, said voter dilution claims are not allowed under federal law.

One of the dissenters, Justice David Souter, said if districts must be at least 50 percent black voters to satisfy federal law, "minority voters in such a district will have no right to claim relief under section 2 from a statewide districting scheme that dilutes minority voting rights."

(State Board of Elections et al vs. Strickland et al, No. 07-689)