¶1Appeal from D. C. E. D. N. C. Probable jurisdiction noted. Argument shall be limited to the following question which all parties are directed to brief: “Whether a state legislature’s intent to comply with the Voting Rights Act and the Attorney General’s interpretation thereof precludes a finding that the legislature’s congressional redistricting plan was adopted with in*1020vidious discriminatory intent where the legislature did not accede to the plan suggested by the Attorney General but instead developed its own.”
121 L. Ed. 2d 580
Shaw v. Barr
Decided December 7, 1992
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1992-12-07
How this case has been cited
Cited by 895 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. (1993), Nobelman v. American Savings Bank (1993)
457 federal appellate · 65 district · 84 state decisions — followed in 24 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →