Zimmer v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The Supreme Court has put tight reins on judicial power to reapportion because of the judiciary’s uneasy position in these cases. The least representative branch of the government must take care when it reforms the most representative branch. We have recognized that race may be considered as a factor in determining whether a proposed apportionment is acceptable .... But we have also held that “safe” seats for the minority are not required of a reapportionment plan in a dilution case. The district judge must [therefore] be mindful of the impact of the proposed plans on different racial groups. His duty is to avoid both gerrymanders and racial dilution requires that much. The judge must analyze the plan and determine that the probable results are such that minority strength is not diluted. But this legitimate concern with the outcome cannot justify a strict proportionality brought about by manipulation of district lines. If the plan passes the dilution test, ... race is no longer an important factor. The boundaries should be drawn with an eye to compactness, contiguousness, and the preservation of natural, political, and traditional boundaries; Not racially balanced representation. We are not legislatures.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Johnson v. Mortham