Chen v. City of Houston

Background

Houston residents sued the city after a 1997 redrawing of single-member city council districts. They said the city placed a newly annexed, mostly white suburb in a way that kept minority districts smaller and diluted minority voting strength. The district court granted summary judgment to the city, the Fifth Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court declined to review the case.

Reasoning

The main question was what number should be equal across districts for a fair vote—total population or the number of citizens old enough to vote. Justice Thomas’s dissent explains that earlier cases require districts to be nearly equal in population but never defined which population to count. He notes a common 10% maximum deviation rule and says the city’s plan fell under that limit if total population is used, but would show much larger deviations—about 20% to 32.5%—if citizen voting-age population were used. The dissent highlights disagreement among federal appeals courts about this choice and argues the Supreme Court should resolve it before jurisdictions use new 2000 census figures.

Real world impact

Because the Court refused review, the lower-court rulings upholding Houston’s map remain in place and the national question stays unresolved. Cities and states preparing to redraw districts for the census will not get a Supreme Court rule yet on whether to count total residents or only voting-age citizens. That uncertainty could affect how much weight different voters’ ballots carry in many places.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Thomas dissented from the denial and would have granted review to settle the split among appeals courts and give clear guidance before the 2000 census.