Chen v. City of Houston

Background

A group of Houston residents sued the city after the 1997 city council map placed the newly annexed, mostly white Kingwood neighborhood into a predominantly white district. They say the city drew some largely Black and Hispanic districts smaller on purpose, so votes in those “minority” districts would count for less than votes in larger, mostly white districts. The lower federal courts ruled for the city, and the Supreme Court declined to take the case.

Reasoning

The central question is simple: when governments draw equal districts, which population should they try to equalize — total people living in each district, or only citizens of voting age? The dissent explains that past decisions require districts to be nearly equal in population and that plans with more than a 10% difference raise suspicion. Different appeals courts disagree: some treat the choice as a political decision for states, while another said counting only voters could be unconstitutional. The dissenting justice would have asked the Court to settle this split and tell local governments which number to use.

Real world impact

If total population controls, Houston’s map showed only small disparities; if citizen voting-age population controls, the differences are much larger and arguably dilute minority votes. The question matters for every city and state that must redraw maps using new census numbers, because the choice changes how much weight different communities’ votes have. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case leaves the disagreement unresolved for now.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Thomas dissented from the Court’s refusal to review, arguing the Court should promptly clarify which population measure governs one-person, one-vote claims, especially before the 2000 census redistricting rush.