Easley v Cromartie

Easley v Cromartie - Factbites
Where results make sense
About us | Why use us? | Reviews | PR | Contact us

Topic: Easley v Cromartie

Note: these results are not from the primary (high quality) database.

In the News (Sat 2 Jun 12)

EXECUTIVE POWER

Iran

ANALYSIS

Pakistan

Family compact

	Untitled Document
		Cromartie, the Court, in what some may view as judicial slight of hand, found that race was significant, but not predominate, because the goal was to achieve a safe Democratic Congressional district in North Carolina.
		Gore, the Supreme Court's decision in the North Carolina redistricting case of Easley v.
		The partisan stake in the outcome of this process is, in fact, so high that office holders have hired professional lobbyists to insure that their chances of re-election are not diminished.
	www.cuip.org /commentary/xxxcommentaryarchive/kresky/kresky20010515.htm (744 words)

	CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING IN NORTH CAROLINA: RECONSIDERING TRADITIONAL CRITERIA
		Indeed, if the departures are found to be due to non-racial political reasons, or even if these reasons cannot be dismissed as the predominant motive, then the Court shows no further interest, no matter how pronounced they may be.
		The role of "traditional districting principles" in the design of representational districts was elevated in the 1990s when the United States Supreme Court decided SHAW v.
		The principles, or criteria, for districts that received the most attention in these cases are contiguity, compactness, and respect for both political subdivision boundaries and communities of interest.
	www.bsos.umd.edu /gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/Thompson1203.htm (1960 words)

	VIETH V. JUBELIRER
		Similarly, in gerrymandered districts, instead of local groups defined by neutral criteria selecting their representatives, it is the architects of the districts who select the constituencies and, in effect, the representatives.
		State action that discriminates against a political minority for the sole and unadorned purpose of maximizing the power of the majority plainly violates the decisionmaker’s duty to remain impartial.
		In the realm of federal elections, the requirement of governmental neutrality is buttressed by this Court’s recognition that the Elections Clause is not & source of power to dictate electoral outcomes, to favor or disfavor a class of candidates, or to evade important constitutional restraints.’ ” Cook v.
	www.law.cornell.edu /supct/html/02-1580.ZD.html (6880 words)

	Category:2001 in law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Category:2001_in_law (93 words)

	UNM School of Law Journals New Mexico Law Review Volume 32 No. 3 Summer 2002
		Cromartie, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of racial discrimination by states when drawing their congressional and legislative districts.
		The question of how well is our tax system serving us still and will continue to be an important one for our state’s future successes.
		Workers’ Compensation: Exclusivity, Common Law Remedies and the Reconsideration of the Actual Intent Test—Delgado v.
	lawschool.unm.edu /nmlr/volumes/32/vol3.php (545 words)

	People For the American Way - Endnotes
		Cromartie are considered as listed in both questionnaires, it brings the total number of cases in common to 59.
		In that case, the appeals court vacated defendant’s forty-five year sentence after finding that Boyle had improperly sentenced the defendant to consecutive sentences for possession and non-registration of two pipe bombs and incorrectly classified the defendant as a “career criminal” for the purpose of determining the proper sentencing guidelines.
		This number was derived by multiplying 12,000 by 10% to find the total number of Boyle cases to have been appealed according to his 2005 questionnaire, then dividing the number of Boyle cases that have been reversed by that number.
	www.pfaw.org /pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=18013 (1099 words)

	Landmark 5-4 Decisions Supreme Court Watch
		Cromartie, the Court upheld, 5-4, the validity of a redistricting effort, determining that, because the state’s black voters voted overwhelmingly for one political party, the redistricting was based on permissible factors like protecting incumbents, rather than on impermissible racial considerations.
		It was the first time in almost 70 years that the Court invalidated a federal law on the grounds that it exceeded Congress’ authority to regulate interstate commerce.
		The five-justice majority declared that districts created using race as a factor violated the Equal Protection Clause, even if the district was formed to rectify a history of minority under-representation.
	www.supremecourtwatch.org /scw/landmark_decisions.aspx (1529 words)

	Newest stories about racial gerrymandering: its illegal and unconstitutional, but thriving!
		"Democrats took comfort in a fact that was not directly at issue in the case, Easley v.
		Cromartie: Justices Permit Race as a Factor in Redistricting
		In 1993, the high court said the unusually high concentration of black voters in North Carolina's 12th Congressional District was constitutionally suspect.
	www.adversity.net /special/gerrymander_1.htm (1786 words)

	Racial Gerrymandering is Unconstitutional According to the Supreme Court.
		The theory was that this process gave underrepresented minorities a chance to "elect their own" to office.
		Johnson decision, virtually all geographic voting areas that could be misshapen or distorted into racial districts had already been drawn.
		The Supreme Court struck down this practice as unconstitutional in two landmark rulings: Shaw v.
	www.adversity.net /special/gerrymander.htm (1288 words)

	SobekPundit: Roberts and the Right-Wing Court
		Gore is an example of "conservative judicial activism," rather than, say, a rudimentary grasp of statistical methodology, and Al Gore's transparent attempts to skew statistics in his favor by recounting only in heavily Democrat counties, one example doesn't establish the trend.
		Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001)- loosens restrictions on a State's power to gerrymander on racial lines, if it results in more minorities getting elected.
		The closest thing we'll get to a defense of such a ridiculous statement is a reference to the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v.
	sobekpundit.blogspot.com /2005/07/roberts-and-right-wing-court.html (1042 words)

	Easley v. Cromartie
		Cromartie, 532 US 234 (2001) was a U.S. Supreme Court case.
		The court's ruling on April 18, 2001 stated that redistricting for political reasons did not violate Federal Civil Rights Law banning race-based gerrymandering.
	www.tocatch.info /en/Easley_v._Cromartie.htm (142 words)

	CROMARTIE
		Find graves of people named CROMARTIE at Find-a-Grave.com (or add one that you know).
		Search the CROMARTIE Family Message Boards at Ancestry.com (if available).
		Search the CROMARTIE Family Resource Center at RootsWeb.com (if available).
	www.worldhistory.com /surname/US/C/CROMARTIE.htm (73 words)

	Sandra Day O'Connor -- Britannica Concise Encyclopedia - The online encyclopedia you can trust!
		Reproductive Health Services (1989)—in which the court upheld a Missouri law that prohibited public employees from performing or assisting in abortions not necessary to save a woman's life and that required doctors to determine the viability of a fetus if it was at least 20 weeks old—she reduced the court's opinion to a plurality.
		In her decisions in election law she emphasized the importance of equal-protection claims (Shaw v.
		By “defecting” in part from the conservative majority in Webster v.
	www.britannica.com /ebc/article-9056723 (1302 words)

	GuruNet — Content Map
		A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0-9 @
	www.gurunet.com /cm-dsname-Wikipedia-dsid-2222-letter-1E-first-1301 (28 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

Topic: Easley v Cromartie

Ads by Google

Related Topics

In the News (Sat 2 Jun 12)