Connor v. Williams

404 U.S. 549, 92 S. Ct. 656, 30 L. Ed. 2d 704, 1972 U.S. LEXIS 96
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided January 24, 1972·No. 71-221·Published·Cited by 81 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

After determining that the reapportionment plan for the State Senate and House of Representatives, passed by the Mississippi Legislature in January 1971, failed to comply with the Equal Protection Clause because of a total variance of 26% between the largest and the smallest senatorial district (a determination that was not appealed), 1 the District Court fashioned its own plan for *550 the quadrennial elections for both Houses scheduled for 1971, and these elections were held under the court’s plan. Connor v. Johnson, 330 F. Supp. 506 (SD Miss. 1971). Appellants now challenge the constitutionality of the court’s plan, contending that a total variance of 18.9% between the largest and smallest Senate district and one of 19.7%- between the largest and smallest House district require that the court’s districting plan be voided, a new plan instituted, and new elections held. 2

Appellants rely on our recent cases invalidating congressional redistricting statutes that contained total variations of 5.97%, Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, 394 U. S. 526 (1969), and of 13.1%, Wells v. Rockefeller, 394 U. S. 542 (1969), between the largest and the smallest districts. These decisions do not squarely control the instant appeal since they do not concern state legislative apportionment, but they do raise substantial questions concerning the constitutionality of the District Court’s plan as a design for permanent apportionment.

But conceding, arguendo, that the District Court’s plan does not precisely square with Fourteenth Amendment requirements, it does not necessarily follow that the 1971 elections must be invalidated and new elections ordered. Mann v. Davis, 238 F. Supp. 458 (ED Va. 1964), aff’d sub nom. Hughes v. WMCA, 379 U. S. 694 (1965); Toombs v. Fortson, 241 F. Supp. 65, 71 (ND Ga. 1965), aff’d, 384 U. S. 210 (1966); Drum v. Seawell, 249 F. Supp. *551 877, 881-882 (MDNC 1965), aff’d, 383 U. S. 831 (1966). In the circumstances of this case, we decline to disturb these elections.

The prospective validity of the plan for the 1975 elections, absent legislative action, poses different issues, but we need not decide those questions at the present time. Under the District Court plan, approximately one-fifth of the seats in both Houses were filled by at-large elections from temporary countywide districts in 1971. 3 The District Court retained jurisdiction over these three counties and ordered that a Special Master be appointed in January 1972 to “take testimony and make findings as to whether the Counties of Hinds, Harrison, and Jackson may feasibly be divided into districts of substantially equal numbers in population for the elections of 1975 and 1979.” 330 F. Supp., at 519. Such proceedings should go forward and be promptly concluded, for, as this Court has emphasized, “when district courts are forced to fashion apportionment plans, single-member districts are preferable to large multi-member districts as a general matter.” Connor v. Johnson, 402 U. S. 690, 692 (1971). Pending completion of those proceedings, we deem it inappropriate to give further consideration to this case. If we are to consider the applicability of Preisler and Wells to state legislative districts, it would be preferable to have before us a final judgment with respect to the *552 entire State. 4 To accomplish this result and to preserve the right to appeal from such a judgment, the judgment of the District Court is vacated, except insofar as it applied to the 1971 elections, and the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

So ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Connor v. Williams, 404 U.S. 549, 92 S. Ct. 656, 30 L. Ed. 2d 704, 1972 U.S. LEXIS 96 (1972).

404 U.S. 549 (Connor v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Allen v. Walsh
S.D. New York, 2025
Richard Rose v. Secretary, State of Georgia
107 F.4th 1272 (Eleventh Circuit, 2024)
Arnesen v. Raimondo
S.D. Mississippi, 2024
Bhatti v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency
332 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (D. Maine, 2018)
John Jay Hooker v. Governor Bill Haslam
437 S.W.3d 409 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2014)
Kahn v. Griffin
701 N.W.2d 815 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 2005)
McNeil v. Legislative Apportionment Commission
828 A.2d 840 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2003)
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Texas Attorney General Reports, 2003
Commonwealth v. Dalal
39 Va. Cir. 91 (Fairfax County Circuit Court, 1996)
Pueblo v. Ramos Santos
138 P.R. Dec. 810 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1995)
Ryder v. United States
515 U.S. 177 (Supreme Court, 1995)
Terrazas v. Ramirez
829 S.W.2d 712 (Texas Supreme Court, 1991)
Watkins v. Mabus
771 F. Supp. 789 (S.D. Mississippi, 1991)
Tallahassee Branch of Naacp v. Leon County, Florida
827 F.2d 1436 (Eleventh Circuit, 1987)
Gjersten v. Board of Election Commissioners
791 F.2d 472 (Seventh Circuit, 1986)
James v. City of Sarasota, Fla.
611 F. Supp. 25 (M.D. Florida, 1985)
Gingles v. Edmisten
590 F. Supp. 345 (E.D. North Carolina, 1984)