Karcher v. Daggett

1983-06-22

Headline: Congressional map with under 1% population difference struck down; Court requires states to show good-faith equalization or specific justification, affecting voters and state redistricting choices.

Holding: The Court affirmed that New Jersey’s 1982 congressional plan violated the Constitution because even small population deviations (about 0.7%) must result from a good-faith effort to equalize or be specifically justified by the State.

Real World Impact:

Allows courts to strike down maps with unexplained population deviations, even under 1%.
Forces state legislatures to justify small population differences when drawing congressional districts.
Encourages challenges based on oddly shaped districts as partisan gerrymanders.

Topics: congressional redistricting, population equality, gerrymandering, census accuracy, voting maps

Summary

Background

After the 1980 census New Jersey lost a House seat and the Legislature adopted the Feldman Plan with 14 districts. The plan’s average district was 526,059 people; the largest had 527,472 and the smallest 523,798 — a 3,674-person difference (0.6984%). Challengers, including incumbent New Jersey Members of Congress, sued and a three-judge District Court declared the plan unconstitutional. The legislature had other proposals before it, including a Reock plan with a smaller maximum deviation (0.4514%).

Reasoning

The Court asked whether a plan with a largest-to-smallest deviation under one percent automatically satisfies the Constitution. Relying on prior cases, the majority held that states must make a good-faith effort to achieve equal population and must justify every deviation that could practicably be avoided. The Court rejected the argument that routine census undercount made small deviations automatically acceptable. Because challengers showed the Feldman Plan’s differences could have been reduced and the State failed to show a specific, consistent justification tied to those variances, the Court affirmed the District Court’s judgment against the plan.

Real world impact

The decision means state lawmakers cannot assume tiny population differences are harmless; they must either strive for closer numerical equality or provide clear, specific reasons for departures. The concurrence added that unusually shaped districts can support challenges as partisan gerrymanders. The dissent warned this rule may increase litigation and urged deference given census imprecision and practical voting differences.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens concurred, emphasizing that bizarre shapes and decisionmaking that looks partisan can independently support invalidation as a form of vote dilution. Justice White and others dissented, arguing the small deviations were de minimis and cautioned against judicial intrusion.