Cantor v. Personhuballah

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
14-518 E.D. Va. Not Argued Mar 30, 2015 TBD TBD OT 2014

Issue: (1) Whether the court below erred in failing to make the required finding that race rather than politics predominated in Virginia Congressional District 3, where there is no dispute that politics explains the enacted plan; (2) whether the court below erred in relieving plaintiffs of their burden to show an alternative plan that achieves the General Assembly's political goals, is comparably consistent with traditional districting principles, and brings about greater racial balance than the Enacted Plan; (3) whether, regardless of any other error, the court below's finding of a Shaw v. Reno violation was based on clearly erroneous fact-finding; and (4) whether the majority erred in holding that strict scrutiny requires a legislature to adopt the least restrictive means possible for complying with the Voting Rights Act, instead of a redistricting plan that substantially addresses such compliance.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Oct 31 2014Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due December 4, 2014)
Dec 4 2014Motion to dismiss or affirm filed by appellees Gloria Personhuballah and James Farkas.
Dec 22 2014Reply of appellant Eric Cantor, et al., Appellants filed. (Distributed)
Dec 23 2014DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 9, 2015.
Mar 25 2015DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 27, 2015.
Mar 30 2015Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, 575 U. S. ____ (2015).
May 1 2015JUDGMENT ISSUED.
 
Share:
Term Snapshot
At a Glance
Awards