Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-11T17:09:25.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shaw v. Reno: A Constitutional Setback for Minority Representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Frank R. Parker
Frank R. Parker*
Affiliation:
District of Columbia School of Law
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 47 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Davis v. Bandemer. 1986. 478 U.S. 109.Google Scholar
Grofman, Bernard, Handley, Lisa, and Niemi, Richard G. 1992. Minority Representation and the Quest for Voting Equality. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handley, Lisa, and Grofman, Bernard. 1994. “The Impact of the Voting Rights Act on Minority Representation.” In Quiet Revolution in the South, ed., Davidson, Chandler and Grofman, Bernard. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. 1991. Black Elected Officials, A National Roster: 1991. Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies Press.Google Scholar
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. 1993. Black Elected Officials. A National Roster: 1993. Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies Press.Google Scholar
Loewen, James. 1990. “Racial Bloc Voting and Political Mobilization in South Carolina.” Review of Black Political Economy 19:589–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemi, Richard G., Grofman, Bernard, Carlucci, Carl, and Hofeller, Thomas. 1990. “Measuring Compactness and the Role of a Compactness Standard in a Test for Partisan and Racial Gerrymandering.” Journal of Politics 52:1155–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Frank R. 1985. “The Mississippi Congressional Redistricting Case: A Case Study in Minority Vote Dilution.” Howard Law Journal 28:397–415.Google Scholar
Pildes, Richard H., and Niemi, Richard G. 1993. “Expressive Harms, ‘Bizarre Districts,’ and Voting Rights: Evaluating Election-District Appearances After Shaw v. Reno .” Michigan Law Review 92:483–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polsby, Daniel D., and Popper, Richard D. 1991. “The Third Criterion: Compactness as a Procedural Safeguard Against Partisan Gerrymandering.” Yale Law & Policy Review 9:301–53.Google Scholar
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. 1978. 438 U.S. 265.Google Scholar
Shaw v. Reno. 1993. 113 S.Ct. 2816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, Harold W., and Niemi, Richard T.. 1992. Vital Statistics on American Politics. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Thornburg v. Gingles. 1986. 478 U.S. 30.Google Scholar
United Jewish Organizations v. Carey. 1977. 430 U.S. 144.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1993. Press Release, “Number of Congressional Districts with Black or Hispanic Majorities Doubles, Census Bureau Says.” Rev. Mar. 24, 1993.Google Scholar
Young, H. P. 1988. “Measuring the Compactness of Legislative Districts.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 13:105–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar