*1 buyer is delivered. trees not balance, or $107.60. entitled judgment buyer is entitled
8. The $4,778.45, exclusive
in the amount interest.
costs and buyer to re- not entitled
9. pre-judgment interest.
cover plain- by the be borne 10. Costs will 1332(b).
tiff. U.S.C. § Plaintiffs, al., et
William DAVID CAHILL, Governor
William T. Jersey, al., et State Defendants, al., et Intervenors.
James J. Howard 1914-71.
Civ. No. Court, District
United States Jersey, D. New Division.
Civil
March 1972. April 1972.
Memorandum April
As Amended *2 Representatives from New
House of Jersey The to intervene as defendants. Howard, members, J. Democratic James Jr., Roe, Thompson, Frank Robert A. Jr., Henry Rodino, Helstoski, Peter W. Minish, Joseph Dominick Daniels G. V. represented and Edward J. Patten are by Warren, Goldberg Brown, Vogelman, Ashley, Morris & Esqs. Berman, & by Jersey City, plaintiffs; J.,N. for Hunt, Republican members, E. The John Irving Vogel- Raymond Brown, I. Frelinghuy- Sandman, Peter Charles W. man, Jersey City, N. J. sen, Forsythe, B. Edwin B. William Warren, Berman, Trenton, Goldberg & rep- Dwyer, P. Widnall Florence defendants; by J.,N. for David J. Gold- by Farley Rush, Esqs. All de- resented & berg, Trenton, N. J. stipulated plain- that the fendants have Farley Rush, Newark, J., & N. for standing appropriate tiffs have and are Hunt, Sandman, John E. Charles W. representatives. parties class All Frelinghuysen, For- Peter Edward B. joined facts, stipulation in a and all sythe, William B. Florence Widnall and they no have conceded that offer would Dwyer; by Farley, B. Thomas R. New- except in the evidence stipulation for that contained ark, N. J. bearing upon facts George Kugler, Gen., Atty. F. Jr., for congressional constitutionality of the dis- Cahill, Sherwin, William T. Paul J. tricting plan set forth in N.J.S. 19:46-3. County William Yeomans Essex stipulation appear: In the these facts Elections; by Board of I. Morton Green- Jersey New into fif divided is berg, Atty. Gen., Trenton, Asst. N. J. congressional teen districts. 1970 Federal Census corrected the Bu MEMORANDUM AND ORDER January 3, reau of Census as of 1972 GIBBONS, Judge, Jersey’s Before population Circuit New establishes FISHER, Judges. 7,170,885. GARTH and District With an ideal upon population district based con would PER CURIAM. 478,059. population, tain In fact ideal, percentage deviation from the citizens, plaintiffs, In this action the Jersey’s of relative fif deviation New residents, registered of New voters teen districts is as follows: Jersey, suing on their own behalf and on similarly situated, behalf of those Rel. % Of unconstitutionality seek a declaration of District Population Deviation Deviation injunction against and an enforcement 483,518 5,459 1 1.14 + + — 416,317 19:46-3, 2 61,742 —12.92 N.J.S. districts which creates 558,176 3 80,117 + +16.76 Repre- for the election of United States 525,322 4 47,263 9.89 + + Jersey. sentatives Jurisdic- 5 581,826 +103,767 +21.71 629,444 +151,385 6 +31.67 tion is under asserted 28 U.S.C. § — — 7 463,475 14,584 3.05 initial defendants were the Governor — — 460,782 17,277 8 3.61 — — State, State, Secretary 44,386 433,673 9 9.28 — — 7.55 441,960 36,099 10 Superintendent of Elections Essex — 94,977 11 383,082 —19.87 — County and the Essex Board of — 467,196 10,863 12 2.27 — Attorney Elections. The General of New 392,626 85,433 13 —17.87 — 398,390 79,669 14 —16.67 appeared on behalf of these 57,039 15 + +11.93 per- defendants. On motion this court Total 7,170,885 mitted incumbent members1 of cent of per Mean relative deviation 12.41 Warren, 1. The notice of motion the firm of to intervene did cause indicate that represent congressman Goldberg Mr. list the incumbent from the & Berman does Gallagher, Gallagher. 13th district E. Cornelius Subsequent papers Democrat. in the filed
465 districting primary election candidates congressional Patently the or the election general candidates un- 19:46-3 in N.J.S. forth set Preisler, office election Kirkpatrick v. constitutional. Repre- member of the House L.Ed.2d 526, 89 S.Ct. 394 U.S. Rockefeller, from the sentatives (1969); Wells presently N. created L.Ed.2d 89 S.Ct. U.S. *3 19:46-3. J.S. (1969). hearing 3. That this court shall hold a Jersey primary elec- provides for New at the Post Office United States seq. Petitions et 19:23-l tions. N.J.S. nominating 8, Courthouse, and No. Courtroom for to be voted candidates beginning April Monday, on political party in by of a the voters A.M., at or soon thereafter 10:00 as are addressed district may as counsel heard with re- Secretary 19:23-6. N.J.S. of the State. spect to other or further relief. the petitions forth that must set The signers qualified of voters the any party are 4. That who intends to sub- they de- gressional for which mit for consideration any plan the court N.J.S. candidate. program whereby to nominate a sire or the congressional primaries may approve For 19:23-7. a court initiate or signatures required. N. are carrying two hundred out method for filed general must be primary Petitions J.S. 19:23-8. for elections Secretary before 4:00 Repre- of State with the members of the House of day preceding Jersey on fortieth next P.M. either sentatives from New holding primary large election. shall file from districts or at for June program scheduled that election is such or with Since filing 1972, 6, 19:23-40, the last N.J.S. Clerk of the United States District Court, Newark, April 27,1972. Jersey, and date would be New attorneys copies for serve on the congres held that the We have action, parties no later to this districting plan is unconstitution sional P.M. on March than 4:00 together congres step al. the first Since set- with a memorandum filing process of sional is the electoral ting proponents’ conten- forth the nominating petitions signed by party plan conforms how the tions as to congres of a who are residents members I, 2 of with Article Section district, present sional gressional con since the Constitution. States United unconstitutionally are constituted, step no be taken valid and FINAL MEMORANDUM congres respect with nomination of JUDGMENT sional candidates. it Therefore PER is ORDERED CURIAM. Secretary
1. That
of
of
State
citizens,
plaintiffs,
In this action
hereby
New
en-
registered
residents,
New
voters
joined
restrained, pending
suing
and on
own behalf
Jersey,
on their
court,
further order of
from
this
situated,
similarly
those
of all
behalf
receiving
filing nominating pe-
or
sought
declaration of unconstitution-
titions for candidates for member-
against
ality
injunction
enforce-
ship
Representa-
in the House of
19:46-3,
creates
ment of N.J.S.
primary
tives for the
election now
States
of United
the election
districts for
scheduled for June
1972.
Jersey. Juris-
Representatives from New
U.S.C. §
under 28
2.
asserted
That each
dietion is
of the defendants be and
were
hereby enjoined
initial defendants
The
and restrain-
Secretary
State,
pending
ed,
the further order of Governor
Elections
Superintendent State,
taking any steps
this
from
court
County
Essex
looking
of Essex
toward
nomination
Attorney
Representatives
The
bers
the House
Board of Elections.
Jersey.
Jersey appeared
New
Pursuant to that invitation
General of New
on be-
intervening
congressmen,
half of
Democratic
these defendants. On motion
congressmen,
Republican
permitted
the incumbent
court
incumbent members
Secretary
Jersey, the
Representatives
the
plaintiffs,
of New
the
Jersey
State
House of
a number of
interested
defendants.
intervene as
organization
citizens,
members,
Howard,
a labor
sub-
Democratic
J.
James
districting
Roe,
Thompson, Jr.,
mitted
for considera-
Frank
Henry Helstoski,
Robert A.
filing
Rodino, Jr.,
permitted
each
tion. We
Peter W.
Joseph Minish,
plans,
these
have examined
G.
Dominick
Daniels
V.
hearing
represented
number
all of
At
Edward J. Patten are
them.
Goldberg Berman, Esqs.
Warren,
or-
citizens and one labor
&
interested
Republican members,
Hunt,
ganization
parties.
John E.
moved to intervene
Freling-
Sandman, Peter
W.
last
Charles
We
these
minute motions
denied
*4
Forsythe,
suggested
any
huysen,
B.
B.
Edwin
William
intervene
that
wit-
but
Dwyer,
might
sup-
are
Widnall and Florence P.
represented by Farley
nesses which
port
be available
Esqs.
Rush,
suggested
&
any
should be
stipulated
the
parties
All defendants have
to
to
called
attention
the
the
standing
plaintiffs have
hearing
and
the
In the
we heard
lawsuit.
ap-
propriate
representatives. All
class
testimony
five
witnesses.
the
facts,
parties joined
stipulation
in a
Bergen
Allen,
Clerk
Alexander
the
they
would
no
concededthat
offer
County,
about
difficulties
testified
the
except for
in the
evidence
stipulation
that contained
by the elec-
which
encountered
would be
bearing
upon
of facts
the
if
tion
of the
officials
various
congressional
stitutionality of
dis-
the
congressional
we were
elec-
to order the
tricting plan set
forth
19:46-3.
N.J.S.
large
from
held at
rather than
tion
single
be
congressional
We held that
the
dis
member
U.S.C.
districts. Cf.
tricting plan set forth in
19:46-3
N.J.S.
it is
2c.
we have concluded that
Since
§
was,
under the
announced
standards
feasible for
lishing single
to enter
order estab-
us
Kirkpatrick
526,
Preisler, 394
U.S.
from
member
(1969)
1225,
S.Ct.
We find facts: districting plan 6. Under the Jersey population held to be unconstitu- the 1970 decennial census as cor- tional the three counties rected the Bureau of Census as State, northeast corner of 7,170,885. January 1972, is Bergen, Essex, Hudson size, 2. The ideal based on represented congressmen. by six 478,059 population, people. is represented by Hudson two con- is organized 3. New is into gressmen, with the former thir- twenty one counties which are borrowing popu- teenth district subdivided into 567 munici- some County. lation from Union Union palities. no unincor- There are population increased in porated territories. 504,255 543,116 from in 1960 to population 4. The separated in 1970. is Union census, the 1970 as corrected line, only by Hudson not 3, 1972, January order of Bay, Newark a substantial magnitude is as follows: geographic barrier. clear that with increases in Essex having place taken elsewhere *6 Bergen 897,148 redistricting approach of annex- 609,266 Hudson ing part growing county a 583,813 Middlesex in Hudson order to maintain two 543,116 Union seats for that 461,849 Monmouth inequitable. is Northern Hudson 460,782 Passaic separated by any is not 456,291 Camden geographic Bergen barriers from 383,454 Morris Burlington County. No more than five con- 323,132 gressional seats be allocated 303,968 Mercer populations Bergen, to the core 208,470 Ocean Hudson and Essex. 198,372 Somerset impossible 7. It a is redistrict on 175,043 Atlantic preserve basis which will all coun- 172,681 Gloucester ty. Essex, counties, lines. Five 121,374 Cumberland Hudson, Bergen, Middlesex and 77,528 Sussex Union, larger substantially are 73,960 Warren than ideal district. Thirteen 69,718 Hunterdon Morris, counties, Burlington, Mer- 60,346 Salem cer, Ocean, Atlantic, Somerset, Cape May 59,554 Gloucester, Cumberland, Sussex, Warren, Hunterdon, Salem and only county popu- substantially Cape May The which lost small- lation the 1960 since er than census district. Three ideal 610,- Hudson, Monmouth, Passaic, which declined from
469 approach the ideal district we make Camden a choice on the evidence before adjoin evidence, coun- us. size in each case in but One DS large they represents judgment must ties are so in our best bal- ancing they split must so small or the criteria we have listed. having following population per addi- combined with areas achieves district, population. ideal, tional deviation from percentage of deviation: large number 8. Because of the relatively of New Jer- small area
propriate ways to redistrict these purpose sey’s municipalities it is nicipal lines toral represent, cal strong Minimum centers We is machinery while lines. Preservation local redistricting home rule desirable have considered population simplifying preserving most mu- governmental community in not many tradition, these state also because only for different deviation criteria: interest. possible with a as units such elec- logi- ap District 10 4 2 1 3 6 5 7 9 8 1970 7,170,885 478,007 477,744 478,444 478,126 478,157 478,002 477,730 478,069 478,109 478,221 477,887 478,245 478,098 478,097 Population Deviation —315 — 52 —172 —329 — 57 —110 + 67+ 98+ +162 +385 +186 + 39+ [10] 38+ 50 Deviation —.011 —.023 —.036 —.066 +.014 —.012 —.069 +.034 +.020 +.008 +.010 +.039 +.081 +.002 +.008 % of .029 among districts. These deviations are small compactness Contiguity B. significant. set forth districts. lines DS 5 follows most former considered, preservation nearly munici- C. of whole as single palities in wher- districts a core of constit leaves substantial possible. except
ever
in all former
uents
new
Thirteenth District.
leaves
fragmentation
D.
Minimum
coun-
single
municipalities except
one
ties.
congressional district. This
munici
one
Recognition
popu-
E.
of increases
township
Hackensack,
pality,
South
is
in newer communities and
lation
non-contiguous
consisting
areas.
of three
population in
older
decreases
proposed
One such area
Ninth
communities
District,
the other two are
while
starting point
F. Use
as
legislative
*7
proposed
District.2
Seventh
We
last
of
determination
the
from
that
verified
official sources
appropriate districts.
pro
part
South Hackensack
the
of
comprises
posed
unpop
Ninth District
Except
A,
pop-
criterion
minimum
for
deviation,
the
ulated marshland beside
Hackensack
of
ulation
course
which is
part
that
of
priorities
Thus
of
River.
shift
paramount, no exact order of
Ninth District
South Hackensack to the
for these criteria can be established.
purpose maintaining
balancing
for
of
the
The task
one. Moreover
ais
upon
contiguity
effect
the
no real
there is
almost limitless number of
single
municipalities
whereby
of
possible
maintenance
combinations
balance
plan
forth
DS
districts. The
set
practical
limita-
be achieved.
reducing
the
con
also
result of
judicial process
of
achieves
dictate that
tions
the
geographically
becoming
(DS 5) placed
an island
ments
2. Senate Bill No. 827
entirely
non-contiguous
segments
located in and
surrounded
of the mu-
three
adap-
Congressional
Our
nicipality
Ninth
District.
within
of South Hackensack
incorporates
is-
that
Congressional
of this
tation
District
even
the Seventh
surrounding
though
seg-
Ninth District.
land
into
of those
this resulted
one
Burlington city,
Bergen,
township,
gressional
and
Hudson
Bordentown
Burlington
seats
recognizing
township,
five,
East-
Chesterfield,
of
six to
Essex from
Mansfield,
Fieldsboro, Florence,
ampton,
growth
has tak
Spring-
Hanover,
North
Hanover,
place
and
of these New
en
to the west
south
Wrightstown,
disturbing
field, Westampton,
and
mini
counties,
to a
of
and
county
existing
portion
of Mercer not
degree
constituencies.
mum
that
congressmen,
Fifth,
Thirteenth
and
places
only
incumbent
contained
Districts,
two
county
portion
County,
district.
and
in the same
that
in Hudson
Every
Brunswick,
embracing
congressman
a resi
of Middlesex
Helmetta, Jamesburg,
East
incumbent
township,
proposed new districts.
Madison
dent of one of
Only
created,
Spots-
Milltown, Monroe,
River,
entirely
South
new district is
one
wood,
county
portion
quadrant
and
of the
State.
that
in the Northwest
Key-
embracing Allentown,
is no incum Monmouth
In
new district there
that
know,
port,
bent,
township,
and
no favored
Matawan
Roosevelt
and so far as
Upper Freehold,
constitute and be
candidate.
shall
called
Fourth
District.
is,
ordered, adjudged and
therefore,
county
Fifth. The
of Somerset and
T.
defendants, William
decreed that the
county
portion of
em-
that
bracing
of Essex
Sherwin,
Yeo-
Cahill,
William F.
Paul J.
Livingston
and Millburn town-
mans,
Board
the Essex
ship,
county
portion
and that
of the
Elections,
election officials of
and all
embracing Princeton,
Mercer
Princeton
acting
in con-
State of
township,
Windsor,
por-
that
West
supervision of
or under the
cert with
county
tion of the
of Middlesex embrac-
primary elec-
of them
conduct the
shall
borough
ing Dunellen
and Middlesex bor-
1972 to choose candidates
on June
ough,
portion
county
of the
Rep-
that
membership in the House of
for
embracing
borough,
Morris
Chatham
Jersey,
from New
resentatives
general
township,
Park,
Chatham
Florham
Han-
7, 1972
on November
election
township, Harding
over
Mad-
township,
Repre-
membership in the House of
borough,
borough,
single
ison
Mendham
Mend-
following
sentatives,
borough,
township,
ham
Morris Plains
member districts:
Morristown,
township, Mountain
Morris
county
First.
Gloucester
Parsippany-Troy
township,
Lakes,
Hills
county
portion
that
of Camden
of the
township,
Passaic
shall
constitute and
District,
Sixth
shall
contained
called
Fifth
District.
District.
stitute
the First
and be called
county
portion
Sixth. All that
of the
Atlantic,
Second. The
Burlington
not contained in the Sec-
May,
Salem,
Cape
Cumberland
por-
Districts,
ond and Fourth
and that
Burlington
county of
portion of the
embracing
county
tion of the
of Camden
River, Washington,
embracing Bass
Hill, Collingswood,
Cherry
town-
Haddon
county
Woodland,
portion
Lawnside,
ship,
Merchantville, Penns-
in the Third
not contained
Ocean
Magnolia,
auken,
Park,
Audubon
Districts,
shall constitute
and Sixth
portion
em-
of Ocean
District.
called
Second
bracing Bay
township,
Head,
Do-
Brick
*8
county
township,
township,
ver
Laval-
Jackson
portion
the
of
Third. All that
Mantoloking
Plumstead,
lette,
the
shall
and
not contained
of Monmouth
and
called the
Dis-
District,
portion
the
constitute
be
Sixth
of
and that
Fourth
Lakewood,
trict.
embracing
county of Ocean
Pleasant, and Point Pleasant
Point
county
portion
the
Seventh.
of
That
the
called
constitute and be
Beach, shall
Eighth,
Bergen
not contained
the
of
District.
Third
Districts,
con-
Ninth and Eleventh
shall
the Seventh Dis-
county
and
called
portion
be
the
of
stitute
Fourth. That
of
city,
Burlington embracing
trict.
Bordentown
county
District,
tained
the Fifth
shall
portion
the
Eighth.
of
That
embracing
stitute
called
Thirteenth Dis-
Wal-
and be
the
Bergen
and
Garfield
of
county trict.
portion of the
that
lington, and
in the Eleventh
not contained
of Passaic
District,
portion
Fourteenth. All
of
that
called
be
constitute and
shall
county of
in the
Hudson not contained
Eighth
District.
Districts,
Ninth and Tenth
shall consti-
county
called the
of
tute and be
Fourteenth Dis-
portion
of
Ninth. That
Bergenfield,
embracing Alpine,
trict.
Bergen
Closter,
Park,
Carlstadt,
Cress-
Cliffside
portion of the
Fifteenth. All that
Dumont,
Demarest,
kill,
East Ruther-
county
of Middlesex not contained
Englewood, Englewood
ford, Edgewater,
Districts,
Fourth and Fifth
and that
Harrington
Lee,
Fairview,
Cliffs,
Fort
portion
county
of Union embrac-
Ferry,
Haworth, Leonia, Little
Park,
ing
township,
Linden and Winfield
shall
Milford,
Moonachie, New
Lyndhurst,
constitute and be called
Fifteenth
Norwood,
Tappan, Pali-
vale,
Old
North
District.
Ridgefield,
Ridge,
Park, Park
sades
party shall
own costs.
Each
bear its
Vale, Rockleigh,
Edge,
Ruth-
River
River
por-
Teterboro,
Tenafly,
erford,
that
J.,
FISHER,
dissents
CLARKSON S.
embracing
county Hudson
tion of the
scope
ordered,
re-
of relief
City,
Bergen,
and Union
North
Secaucus
right
to file Memorandum
serves
non-contiguous part of the
that
setting
Opinion
his reasons.
forth
township
Hackensack bounded
South
Ferry
Moonachie, Little
by Carlstadt,
OPINION
consti-
shall
River,
the Hackensack
FISHER, District
CLARKSON S.
District.
the Ninth
be called
tute and
Judge (dissenting
part).
county of
portion of the
Tenth. That
procedural history
The
factual and
Orange,
embracing
Glen
East
Essex
majority opin
this case is found in the
portion of the
Ridge, Newark, and that
agree except
Harrison,
ion with which I
the ex
embracing
county of Hudson
granted.
scope
tent of the
of the relief
Tenth
called the
shall constitute and be
predicted
for the Dis
difficulties
Distict.
trict Courts
Justice Frankfurter dis
county
portion
Eleventh. That
senting
186,
Carr,
v.
in Baker
369 U.S.
Arlington,
Bergen embracing North
p. 266,
691,
at
82 S.Ct.
have drawn tremely were follows: conditions. as We adverse forced to choose plans their own fish to cal basis. which will be was er agreement that we are evitable Legislature Court had to be It must be borne in mind at the outset groups I labored hard to decide the most submitted was November partisan, with the creating rouses from desirable and any plan changed to between partisan. My individuals, elections. us fry. therefore was only majority by its as chosen factions, an interim Each of lethargy multitude my only dis- soon as it brothers on that having politi- these plan plan this aft- in- 1 2 From ideal: 478,059 DISTRICT POPULATION 1970 12 15 11 14 10 13 7 2 5 1 4 9 8 6 3 Federal 7,170,885 478,054 478,058 478,052 478,067 478,065 478,052 478,057 478,067 478,059 478,055 478,057 478,061 478,059 478,060 Census [1] DEVIATION —7 —5 —1 —2 —7 —4 —2 +6 +8 +2 +3 +1 +8 0 [0] [0] [2] % OF REL. ° —.0002 —.0011 —.0015 +.0017 —.0015 —.0004 —.0008 +.0013 —.0004 +.0002 +.0004 +.0017 +.0006 DEV. .0008 — — expression Supreme The last foregoing plan popula- has minimal subject Court on makes it clear that this deviation, it extent succeeds some been all criteria which have heretofore municipal preserving county give redistricting used cases must compact- and it has lines the virtues of way paramount consideration contiguity. Further, ness it realis- population equality tically approaches shifting popula- Preisler, districts, Kirkpatrick v. 394 this, densely tion of populous the most 1225, 526, 519 U.S. 89 S.Ct. 22 L.Ed.2d addition, plan In state. this uses the although (1968), predictable population which, using approach so-called “core” trends be considered. prior beginning point, districts as a goes on to meet the one man—one vote However, result, achieving this mandate. guided properly by oth- Court should be completely ac- er criteria and I am Although majority gives no con among majority these cord with the sideration to the fact that Senate contiguity compactness of dis- are tricts, preservation only legislative passed was the act which possible wherever Legislature,1 at least one house recognition municipal lines, leading I feel that this should factor changes eye to the Admittedly in our determination. it was legislative previous ap- brought determination Assembly, on the floor of the agree propriate parlia I districts. further failed withdrawn was aas mentary is, tactic. however, at least least some extent these considera- expression legislative some will and tions should balanced. give would allow Court to at least this If do other not consider factors passing salute to Article Section population equality, than this will be- Clause 3 of the Constitution simple come a exercise arithmetic. United States. See Skolnick State of Illinois, F.Supp. Electoral Board my pat- In view the which was (1971) terned on Senate Bill refined Secretary pop- State reduce the got Bill Senate which never out of eight ulation deviation to a maximum of Committee, Senate been selected people people over and plan. seven under When examined to- Court’s 478,059 persons, ideal gether district of with quite appar- Senate it is By plans. our deadline submission of *10 jective criteria, of Senate 827 rather tried de- that the draftsman ent starting point prive representation. blacks of This as a took Senate 744 may may or changed two not for districts to favor be so. is southern expense of another. Court to decide nor No this correct. incumbents brought plan alleviated of this Granted, has nature was be- Court’s evidence us, guiding fore nor are cases situation Hudson there unfair inviolate; correcting any municipal possible Court in keep such lines and does injustice. however, apparent contrary, impropr On the there are I deem Rockefeller, structuring supra, 11th dis- cases as Ince 10th and such v. Wright doing supra, grounds.2 Rockefeller, this In v. hold- on tricts racial ing appor- the draftsman drew the Court cannot is noted that correct it possibly in such a fash- tionment drawn on the 11th district lines a racial lines of nothing by drawing more than it basis own lines on that ion that resembles its. selecting blot, ink basis. a Rorschach majority apparently plan, approach adopted Once a core was it approach from the core deviated desired consistently. should been followed adopted plan a raises and has The racial lines the 10th and 11th Judge grave questions. constitutional districts indicate otherwise. challenge rejecting to a Pollack in a reasons, respectfully For the above I Assembly districting plan York which dissent. argued: split community, black a “ (T)he appears complaint . . . segregation plea
as an unabashed Assembly composition Dis-
tricts, for color rather consciousness Speaking in
than for color blindness. Doug- context, Mr. different Justice repugnance emphasized
las has
plea
principles
such a
racy:
of democ-
boroughs
(like
‘Racial
rotten
CORPORATION,
GARY AIRCRAFT
boroughs),
...
at war with
Plaintiff,
’ Wright v.
democratic standards.
Rockefeller,
v.
52, 62, 84 S.Ct.
376 U.S.
al.,
UNITED STATES of America et
(dis-
(1964)
603, 609,
F.Supp. (S.D.N.Y.1968). argued past purposely split vote was on racial
black legislature lines, that the did not use ob- majority plan adopted contrast, In Under the racial population of the 10th District is 10th and 11th districts under N.J.S. approximately white non-white. 19:46-3 white 52.33% 69% 46.67% the 11th district non-white the 10th and Under 31% 63% only non-white. white and non-white the 11th. white 7.08% 37% 92.80%