Document Type
Article
Media Type
Text
Abstract
By rejecting the Georgia State Legislature's attempt to redraw its political districts to ensure election of black representatives, the Supreme Court in Miller v. Johnson exposed a fallacy that served as the foundation for eighteenth-, nineteenth-, and twentieth-century barriers to minority franchise rights: the idea that minority groups act and vote similarly. Treading lightly through the political thicket of redistricting, the Miller Court eliminated this threat by prohibiting political districts drawn with substantial reliance upon race. This article discusses the merits of the Miller decision and its place in the evolution of minority voting rights. The article also suggests that the Miller Court should have extended its decision to prohibit political as well as racial gerrymandering. Nonetheless, the article concludes that the Court's eradication of racial gerrymandering has finally answered the cry of civil rights activists for total equality.
First Page
155
Last Page
186
Publication Date
11-1-1996
Department
College of Law
ISSN
0734-1490
Language
eng
Publisher
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Recommended Citation
Doak, Darin R.
(1996)
"Miller v. Johnson: Drawing the Line on Racial Gerrymandering,"
Northern Illinois University Law Review: Vol. 17:
Iss.
1, Article 4.
Suggested Citation
Darin R. Doak, Note, Miller v. Johnson: Drawing the Line on Racial Gerrymandering, 17 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 155 (1996).
