Louisiana v. Callais · ¶84

The fourth significant development since Gingles is the increased use and capabilities of computers in drawing districts and creating illustrative maps. With “modern computer technology” at the ready, § 2 plaintiffs invariably invoke the assistance of experts who can generate thousands—or even millions—of maps. Allen, 599 U. S., at 23; see id., at 33, 36 (involving more than 2 million expert-generated maps). Computer algorithms can “easily contro[l] for partisan preferences” and “other redistricting factors such as compactness and county splits.” Alexander, 602 U. S., at 25. With the advent of such technology, if it is possible to identify an alternative map that fully achieves all the State's legitimate goals while producing “ `greater racial balance,' ” then a § 2 plaintiff can easily do so. Id., at 34–35 (quoting Cromartie II, 532 U. S., at 258).

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