Louisiana v. Callais · ¶4
from the same court. can satisfy strict scrutiny: “avoiding imminent and serious risks to human safety in prisons,” and “remediating specific, identified instances of past discrimination that violated the Constitution or a statute.” Stu dents for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U. S. 181. The question presented is whether compliance with § 2 of the Voting Rights Act should be added to this very short list of compelling interests. The Court now holds that compliance with § 2, as properly construed, can provide such an interest. A proper interpretation of § 2 requires examining the statutory text to understand what it demands with respect to drawing legislative districts. Pp. 107–116. (1) Under Section 2(a), the Court takes as a given that a legislative districting map may constitute a “standard, practice, or procedure” that may violate § 2 if it…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.