United States Et Al. v. Mississippi; And Henry Et Al. v. Mississippi

1980-02-19

Headline: Mississippi’s legislative redistricting plan is affirmed, allowing the state map to be used despite claims it dilutes Black voting strength and reduces several majority-Black districts.

Holding:

Real World Impact:

Lets Mississippi use its statutory reapportionment plan in the 1979 elections.
Permits reduction of several majority-Black districts, weakening Black voters’ ability to elect candidates.
Sustains long-running litigation and local political consequences over county delegations and representation.

Topics: voting rights, redistricting, racial discrimination, state legislative maps

Summary

Background

A state legislature in Mississippi passed a new statutory plan in 1978 to redraw state legislative districts. The Attorney General objected under the Voting Rights Act, saying the plan might dilute Black voting strength. Mississippi sued in a three-judge federal court in Washington, D.C., seeking a declaration that the plan complied with the law. While that case was pending, a Mississippi court entered a separate court-ordered plan for the 1979 elections. The D.C. court compared the statutory plan to the 1979 court plan, found no unlawful retrogression, and approved the statutory plan. Both the United States and Black voters appealed.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the legislature’s plan reduced the existing ability of Black voters to elect their preferred candidates. The District of Columbia court measured the statute against the plan then “in effect” and concluded there was no discriminatory purpose or unlawful dilution. The Supreme Court affirmed that approval without issuing a full opinion. Justice Stevens concurred in the judgment, arguing the proper legal comparison should focus on voting strength as it stood when the law was passed rather than on a temporary backup plan.

Real world impact

Because the Court affirmed, the statutory plan could be used in the 1979 elections if cleared, meaning some districts lost majority-Black status under the new map. Dissenting Justices Marshall, Brennan, and White warned the statute fragmented Black communities, reduced majority-Black districts from 49 to 46, and would likely weaken Black electoral power in particular counties. The ruling leaves factual and legal disputes about retrogression and the correct benchmark unresolved and continues a long-running fight over Mississippi representation.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall, joined by Justices Brennan and White, dissented and said the statutory plan fragmented Black communities, eliminated three majority-Black districts, and reduced Black voting strength in several counties, amounting to unlawful retrogression; Justice Stevens wrote separately about the proper benchmark.