Lee v. City of Los Angeles, California

Petition for certiorari denied on June 3, 2019
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
18-1257 9th Cir. N/A N/A N/A N/A OT 2018

Issue: (1) What test - in a case under Shaw v. Reno and its progeny alleging that a city council racially gerrymandered new district boundaries when the central question is whether legislators drew boundaries with a predominant racial intent - governs the assertion of legislative privilege by state and local officials, especially in light of the tension between the Supreme Court's decisions in United States v. Gillock and Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.; (2) whether, if the privilege is qualified, it is overcome by direct and circumstantial evidence that race was likely the predominant factor in drawing boundary lines, including statements by key decision-makers that a district was created to include a specific racial makeup, expert opinion that the boundaries were based on race, and procedural irregularities in the redistricting process; and (3) whether, even if a legislative privilege prevents discovery, Hunt v. Cromartie precludes summary judgment on a Shaw claim in the face of such direct and circumstantial evidence of racial intent because legislative motivation is a factual question for a jury to resolve.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Mar 28 2019Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 1, 2019)
Apr 30 2019Brief of respondent City of Los Angeles in opposition filed.
May 14 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.
May 14 2019Reply of petitioners Peter Lee, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Jun 03 2019Petition DENIED.
 
Share:
Term Snapshot
At a Glance
Awards