Statements (58)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseOutcome |
The ruling limited the ability to draw districts based solely on race.
Important case study in civil rights law. Led to more scrutiny of district maps. Significant for its role in shaping electoral districting. Significantly affected how states approach redistricting. Analyzed for its long-term effects on electoral politics. |
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
Civil rights case
92-357 |
| gptkbp:citedBy |
509 U.S. 630
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Rehnquist_Court
Reno Shaw The_Court_found_that_the_district_was_drawn_predominantly_based_on_race. |
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 28, 1993 |
| gptkbp:filedIn |
April 20, 1993
|
| gptkbp:has_implications_for |
Set a precedent for evaluating racial considerations in districting.
|
| gptkbp:historical_analysis |
Widely studied in law schools.
Scholars debate its implications for democracy. |
| gptkbp:historical_significance |
One of the key cases in the discussion of race and redistricting.
|
| gptkbp:historicalContext |
Part of the broader civil rights movement.
|
| gptkbp:historicalEvent |
Considered a pivotal moment in the fight against racial gerrymandering.
|
| gptkbp:historicalLegacy |
Challenges to other racially motivated districting plans.
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Shaw v. Reno
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced future redistricting cases
|
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
4 The majority opinion emphasized the need for color-blind districting. Emphasized equal protection under the law. Influenced how states draw electoral districts. Strict scrutiny applied to race-based districting. The decision was seen as a victory for opponents of racial gerrymandering. The_case_was_reviewed_under_the_Equal_Protection_Clause. |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Racial gerrymandering
Strict scrutiny standard Continues to be a topic of legal debate. Cited in numerous subsequent cases regarding redistricting. Focused on the intent behind the districting. The district court's decision was reversed. Part of the evolving legal framework regarding race and voting. Addressed the constitutionality of district maps drawn to ensure minority representation. |
| gptkbp:notableEvent |
gptkb:Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965
|
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
A landmark case in the area of electoral law.
Analyzed for its implications on future elections. Documented in legal textbooks and journals. Used in discussions about race and politics. Remains relevant in discussions of electoral fairness. |
| gptkbp:outcome |
The_Court_ruled_that_redistricting_based_on_race_must_be_held_to_a_standard_of_strict_scrutiny.
|
| gptkbp:politicalParty |
gptkb:Justice_Sandra_Day_O'Connor
5-4 |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Strict scrutiny for racial gerrymandering cases
|
| gptkbp:publicAccess |
Mixed reactions regarding race and representation.
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Bush_v._Vera
Implications for future redistricting efforts. Alabama_Legislative_Black_Caucus_v._Alabama Miller_v._Johnson |
| gptkbp:state |
gptkb:North_Carolina
|