Louisiana v. Callais · ¶154
To get at that issue, Gingles initially requires a Section 2 plaintiff asserting vote dilution to satisfy three “preconditions.” 478 U. S., at 50. First, the minority group allegedly harmed must be “sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a reasonably confgured district”—meaning, one “comport[ing] with traditional districting criteria.” Allen, 599 U. S., at 18 (alteration omitted). Second, the identified minority group must be “politically cohesive,” meaning that its members mainly vote for the same parties or candidates. Gingles, 478 U. S., at 51. And third, the majority in the district must “vote[ ] sufficiently as a bloc to enable it . . . usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate.” Ibid. Those three factors, taken together, serve a gatekeeping function. They permit a vote-dilution suit to proceed only if a plaintiff can show that minority…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.