Karcher, Speaker, New Jersey Assembly, Et Al. v. Daggett Et Al.

1984-03-30

Headline: Denies request to pause a district court’s replacement redistricting, allowing the court’s chosen map to govern New Jersey’s upcoming congressional elections and affecting voters and candidates.

Holding: The Court denied a request to pause the district court’s order and allowed the court-selected Forsythe congressional map to be used in New Jersey’s imminent elections while the appeal proceeds.

Real World Impact:

Keeps the Forsythe plan in place for imminent New Jersey congressional elections.
Means about 31.7% of residents would change districts under the court-adopted map.
Leaves the appeal pending, so the map could still change later.

Topics: redistricting, congressional elections, population equality, gerrymandering

Summary

Background

State officials and several Republican congressional candidates disputed New Jersey’s 1982 congressional map (the Feldman Plan) after the Supreme Court found unconstitutional population differences among districts. The State’s legislature later passed a Senate Plan that was vetoed by the Governor. With no valid state plan in place and elections imminent, a three-judge District Court picked the Forsythe Plan from several proposals as the remedial map.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether to pause (stay) the District Court’s order while an appeal proceeds. Justice Stevens, writing for the Court, concluded there was not a strong likelihood that the District Court abused its broad remedial discretion. The Forsythe Plan reduced population deviations more than the Senate Plan and produced more compact districts; the District Court also found the Senate Plan retained signs of intentional partisan gerrymandering. Justice Brennan dissented, joined by Justices White and Marshall, arguing the District Court should have honored state policy and implemented the Senate Plan because it corrected the population imbalance and stayed (paused) the District Court’s order.

Real world impact

The Court’s denial lets the Forsythe map govern New Jersey’s imminent congressional elections while the appeal continues. That map requires many voters to change districts (the opinion notes 31.7% would change under the Forsythe Plan versus under 10% under the Senate Plan). This ruling is an interim procedural decision; the appeal remains pending and the final outcome could still change the map used in later elections.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens concurred with denial, emphasizing district-court discretion and remedial concerns. Justice Brennan would have granted a stay and remanded to implement the Senate Plan.