Louisiana v. Callais · ¶83

That brings us to the third significant post-Gingles development: this Court's decision in Rucho. In that decision, we held that claims of partisan gerrymandering are not justiciable in federal court. See 588 U. S., at 704–710. The upshot of Rucho was that, as far as federal law is concerned, a state legislature may use partisan advantage as a factor in redistricting. And litigants cannot circumvent that rule by dressing their political-gerrymandering claims in racial garb. Imposing liability “based on the racial effects of a political gerrymander in a jurisdiction in which race and partisan preference are very closely correlated . . . would, if accepted, provide a convenient way for future litigants and lower courts to sidestep our holding in Rucho that partisan- gerrymandering claims are not justiciable in federal court.” Alexander, 602 U. S., at 21. “Instead of claiming that a State…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.