979 F.3d 1282
11th Cir.2020Background:
- In 2014 Georgia H.B. 836 reduced the Sumter County School Board from nine single-member seats to seven seats (five single-member districts and two at-large seats).
- Sumter County demographics: ~31,070 population; black plurality overall (52%) and 49.5% of voting-age population; blacks are a slight plurality of registered voters.
- Reverend Mathis Kearse Wright Jr. sued under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, alleging the plan and at-large seats diluted black voting strength.
- After bench trial the district court found the three Gingles preconditions satisfied, that the Senate Factors (notably history of discrimination, racial polarization, socioeconomic disparities, and lack of minority officeholding) supported a §2 violation, and enjoined elections under H.B. 836.
- On remand the court appointed special master Dr. Bernard Grofman, who produced remedial seven-district maps; the court adopted a single-member map (Map Three) giving 3–4 Black opportunity districts and moved elections to November; the County Board appealed.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the full record (including remedial proceedings) and affirmed the district court’s liability and remedy determinations (no clear error).
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether H.B. 836’s structure (two at-large seats + five single-member districts) violates §2 by diluting Black votes | Wright: the plan and at-large seats dilute Black voting strength given polarized voting, socioeconomic disparities, history of discrimination, and lack of minority electoral success | County Board: blacks’ numerical plurality in population/rolls undermines a §2 claim and the record does not show legally significant white bloc voting or lack of remedy | Held: Court affirmed §2 violation; district court did not clearly err in finding Gingles satisfied and totality factors favor plaintiff |
| Whether Wright satisfied the three Gingles preconditions (numerosity/compactness, political cohesion, majority-bloc voting) | Wright: Black voters are sufficiently numerous/compact to form an additional majority district(s); Black voters are politically cohesive; whites usually defeat Black-preferred candidates | County Board: challenges the probative value/quantity of elections analyzed and disputes conclusions on bloc voting and cohesion | Held: Court affirmed that all three Gingles factors were supported by substantial evidence (endogenous at-large elections and other races were persuasive) |
| Whether an available, practicable remedy exists (required to satisfy first Gingles prong and for relief) | Wright: remedial maps (Dr. McBride illustrative; Dr. Grofman’s special-master maps) show 3–4 Black opportunity districts; remedy is feasible without changing board size | County Board: plaintiff’s illustrative remedy insufficient; remedy unworkable or legally suspect | Held: Court held remedial record (special master Grofman’s maps) showed workable remedies; district court did not clearly err in adopting Map Three and ordering November elections |
| Weight to give demographic advantages and evidentiary limitations (e.g., plurality of Blacks, sample of elections) | Wright: demographic plurality does not preclude §2 liability; expert analyses of endogenous elections, polarization, and socioeconomic effects are probative | County Board: district court should have given more weight to Black population/registration advantage and discounted limited/older election data | Held: Court rejected heightened burden or dispositive weight for plurality; affirmed district court’s discretionary probative weighting and reliance on the evidence presented |
Key Cases Cited
- Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986) (sets three preconditions for §2 vote-dilution claims)
- League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006) (totality-of-circumstances and guidance on evaluating §2 claims)
- Growe v. Emison, 507 U.S. 25 (1993) (preference for single-member districts in remedies)
- Johnson v. De Grandy, 512 U.S. 997 (1994) (adopts Senate Report factors and discusses proportionality)
- Solomon v. Liberty Cty. Comm’rs, 221 F.3d 1218 (11th Cir. 2000) (discusses Gingles and Senate Factors in Eleventh Circuit)
- United States v. Marengo Cty. Comm’n, 731 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1984) (socioeconomic disparities from past discrimination and effect on political participation)
- Nipper v. Smith, 39 F.3d 1494 (11th Cir. 1994) (remedy and liability inquiries intertwined)
- Dillard v. Baldwin County Comm’rs, 376 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2004) (remedial availability can affect ongoing finding of §2 liability)
- Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009) (limits on crossover-district claims and majority-bloc-voting requirement)
- Abbott v. Perez, 138 S. Ct. 2305 (2018) (plaintiff must prove a district will perform; burden of proof on validity of illustrative remedial district)