Major v. Treen

574 F. Supp. 325, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 967, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13481
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana
DecidedSeptember 23, 1983
DocketCiv. A. 82-1192
StatusPublished
Cited by57 cases

This text of 574 F. Supp. 325 (Major v. Treen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Major v. Treen, 574 F. Supp. 325, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 967, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13481 (E.D. La. 1983).

Opinion

*327 MEMORANDUM OPINION

POLITZ, Circuit Judge:

Individually and on behalf of all black persons residing and registered to vote in Louisiana, plaintiffs Barbara Major, Michael Darnell, Bernadine St. Cyr, Brenda Quant and Annie A. Smart brought suit under the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, § 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief restraining use of the recent realignment of the state’s congressional districts, Act 20 of the 1981 First Extraordinary Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343, and 42 U.S.C. § 1973j. The gravamen of plaintiffs’ claims is that Act 20 was designed and has the effect of cancelling, minimizing or diluting minority voting strength by dispersing a black population majority in Orleans Parish into two congressional districts. The question posited is whether legislation dividing a highly concentrated black population existing in one geographic and political unit, a parish, into two districts, rather than placing them in a single district in which blacks would constitute a majority, deprives Louisiana’s black voters of the right to effective participation in the electoral process.

Facts and Procedural History

In November 1981, Act 20 of the Louisiana Legislature’s First Extraordinary Session of 1981 apportioned the state into eight single-member congressional districts. Act 1 of that session established new state representative districts. Both enactments were submitted to the Attorney General of the United States for preclearance under § 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. 1 Prior to action by the Attorney General, plaintiffs filed the instant suit attacking both plans on statutory and constitutional grounds. The case was assigned to the docket of Judge Robert F. Collins. On June 1, 1982, the Justice Department interposed a § 5 objection to Act 1, rendering that legislation unenforceable. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.

Judge Collins denied as moot plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate their complaint with one filed by a prospective congressional candidate which was later dismissed for want of a justiciable case or controversy. Robert E. Couhig, Jr. v. James L. Brown, Secretary of State, 538 F.Supp. 1086 (E.D. La.). Defendants’ motion seeking a separate trial of the claims of malapportionment of congressional and state representative districts was granted. Acting on *328 plaintiffs’ uncontested motion for partial summary judgment, Judge Collins declared the 1976 congressional districting plan, Act 697 of the 1976 Louisiana Legislature, unconstitutional because of large population variances among districts when viewed in light of data developed in the 1980 census.

This three-judge court was designated by Chief Judge Charles Clark of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on June 10, 1982. On June 18, 1982, Act 20 was precleared by the Attorney General. After Act 1, as subsequently modified by the Louisiana Legislature, was approved by the Attorney General, plaintiffs amended their complaint to withdraw their challenge to the reapportionment of the Louisiana House of Representatives. In addition, plaintiffs amended their complaint to assert a cause of action under the 1982 amendments to § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973.

By order dated March 7, 1983, this court reaffirmed Judge Collins’ invalidation of Act 697. We granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2), designating a class of persons consisting of all black registered voters residing in the State of Louisiana. Finally, we determined that 28 U.S.C. § 2284(a) vested in this court jurisdiction to entertain plaintiffs’ statutory and constitutional claims. Trial was held from March 7 through March 10, 1983. Decision was deferred pending briefing and oral argument. Having considered the evidence adduced at trial, together with the pleadings, briefs, and oral argument of counsel, the court enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law in conformity with Fed.R. Civ.P. 52(a).

Findings of Fact

Every ten years a reapportionment 2 of existing congressional districts is compelled by Article I, § 2 of the United States Constitution and by Article 3, § 1 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974. In 1972, Louisiana’s eight congressional districts were realigned based on data developed in the 1970 census. At that time the ideal district population was 455,580 persons. While the state remains entitled to eight representatives following the 1980 census, the ideal district population has increased to 525,497 persons. 3

The issue before us principally involves the New Orleans metropolitan area, which encompasses the parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, St. Tammany, Plaquemines and St. Bernard. The 1980 census figures reveal *329 pronounced demographic changes in this area.

During the decade of the 1970s, Orleans Parish (coterminous with the City of New Orleans) experienced a marked change and a slight decline in population. 4 While overall population declined, the black population increased. The city/parish now has a black population of 308,039 persons, which constitutes 55% of the total population, 48.93% of the voting age population, and 44.89% of the registered voters. With the exception of affluent white neighborhoods located in the city’s Garden District and French Quarter, along the lakefront, and near Tulane and Loyola Universities, the black populace is largely concentrated in one contiguous expanse of the inner city.

By contrast, the predominantly white, suburban parishes of Jefferson and St. Tammany, which flank the central city, have undergone explosive population growth.

Related

Perez v. Abbott
253 F. Supp. 3d 864 (W.D. Texas, 2017)
Veasey v. Perry
71 F. Supp. 3d 627 (S.D. Texas, 2014)
United States v. Blaine County
363 F.3d 897 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)
Georgia v. Ashcroft
195 F. Supp. 2d 25 (District of Columbia, 2002)
United States v. Blaine County, Montana
157 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (D. Montana, 2001)
United States v. Blaine County
157 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (D. Montana, 2001)
Clark v. Calhoun County, MS
88 F.3d 1393 (Fifth Circuit, 1996)
Clark v. Calhoun County, Miss.
88 F.3d 1393 (Fifth Circuit, 1996)
Bush v. Vera
517 U.S. 952 (Supreme Court, 1996)
Hays v. Louisiana
936 F. Supp. 360 (W.D. Louisiana, 1996)
Bossier Parish School Bd. v. Reno
907 F. Supp. 434 (District of Columbia, 1995)
United States v. Hays
515 U.S. 737 (Supreme Court, 1995)
Hays v. State of Louisiana
862 F. Supp. 119 (W.D. Louisiana, 1994)
Hays v. State of La.
839 F. Supp. 1188 (W.D. Louisiana, 1993)
DeGrandy v. Wetherell
794 F. Supp. 1076 (N.D. Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
574 F. Supp. 325, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 967, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/major-v-treen-laed-1983.