Joan S. Mahan V

Background

State voters and officials challenged a Virginia law that redrew state Senate and House of Delegates districts. A three-judge federal court found parts of the law unconstitutional, rewrote boundaries for about half the House districts, and adjusted the Senate plan once to account for naval personnel living in the Norfolk–Virginia Beach area. The district court’s plan reduced representational disparity in House districts from 16.4% to 7.2%.

Reasoning

A motion asked a single Justice to stay — that is, temporarily pause — the district court’s order while the case is appealed. Justice Black reviewed the lower court’s near-unanimous work, prior Supreme Court decisions on apportionment, and practical effects such as possible election delays. He judged whether it was reasonably likely that four Justices would vote to hear and reverse the lower court’s ruling. Concluding that four Members were not likely to do so, and mindful that delay could further postpone important state elections, he refused to enter a stay.

Real world impact

Because the stay was denied, the district court’s redistricting plan remains effective while appeals continue. That means many Virginia voters will face changed House district boundaries and representation disparities will be reduced as described by the lower court. The decision also avoids additional delay to scheduling elections that the court found could result from a stay.

Dissents or concurrances

One district judge filed a separate opinion agreeing with most of the ruling but disagreeing about creating a 10-member multi-member district in Fairfax County; the Supreme Court order noted that two judges refused to stay their judgment.