Louisiana v. Callais · ¶155
That threshold test is not easily met. To satisfy the first factor, a plaintiff will have to suggest alternative districting plans complying with such traditional criteria as compactness, contiguity, and respect for geographic boundaries and political subdivisions. And as Allen recently described, the inability to offer such substitute maps has doomed a good many vote-dilution suits. See 599 U. S., at 27–29 (citing Shaw v. Reno, 509 U. S. 630 (1993); Miller v. Johnson, 515 U. S. 900 (1995); Bush v. Vera, 517 U. S. 952 (1996); Abbott v. Perez, 585 U. S. 579 (2018)). Similarly, to satisfy the second and third conditions, the plaintiff must show the existence of racially polarized voting, generally through “statistical evidence of historic voting patterns.” League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U. S. 399, 500 (2006) (Roberts, C. J., concurring in part and dissenting in…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.