Graves v. Barnes

GOLDBERG, Judge, Before Circuit ' WOOD, JUSTICE Judges. presented MEMORANDUM OPINION intervenors have evidence of AND ORDER the effect of the nine multi-member tricts access to PER CURIAM: process, again requiring us once to wan- through der thicket. 13, 1971, this three- December On Since the time of our consideration of pursuant judge convened court was the House Judge districts Dallas and Bexar Brown to hear order Chief Counties, Supreme the decisions of the attacking constitutionality four suits Court in White and of Fifth redistricting Circuit plan of the state Appeals in Zimmer Mc legislature Court v. adopted by the Texas in 1971. Keithen, (5th 1973), 485 F.2d original alleged: (1) 1297 Cir. complaints ra- The McKeithen, and Turner 490 F.2d 191 gerrymandering v. in the establish- cial (5th provided 1973), Cir. consider- ment of the Harris Senatorial proper able instruction on the standards districts; (2) population excessive dis- judgment when among multi-member dis- parities the state’s 101 House alleged deny tricts are to racial or ethnic districts; (3) discrimina- invidious equal protection minorities of the law against tion certain racial and ethnic denying equal politi- them access to the groups as a result multi-member process. White, along cal read with its in eleven House districts counties. antecedents, descendants, collaterals, Barnes, F.Supp. In v. 704 Graves 343 scythed has much underbrush from the (W.D.Tex.1972), upheld the this Court jungle penetrated reapportion- validity Harris of the Senatorial ment path-clearing per- cases. This has unconstitutionally high plan, pop found way mitted us to chart our more secure- appor ulation variances in the House ly along ground. constitutional White scheme, imple tionment and ordered the teaching reaffirmed the of Whitcomb v. single-member mentation of districts Chavis, 124, 1858, 403 U.S. 91 S.Ct. ap Bexar counties for the Dallas and (1971), L.Ed.2d 363 that multi-member proaching Though the 1972 elections. per districts are not unconstitutional se their did withdraw conten emphasized in order to show concerning unconstitutionality tions that multi-member districts have can- remaining of the nine multi-member dis celled minority voting out or minimized Representa tricts in the Texas House of strength, plaintiffs must tives, press under of time and agreement parties 1, testimony produce support findings no evidence to political processes was offered on these ini districts at the leading to tial trial. nomination and election were not equally open participation by the Regester, 755, White 412 U.S. group [racial question ethnic] 2332, (1973), S.Ct. 37 L.Ed.2d 314 —that its opportu- members had less Supreme United States Court reversed nity than did other residents holding our vari- participate district processes plan ances in the 1971 House violated legislators and to elect principle man, vote,” of “one one choice. 412 atU.S. portion S.Ct. affirmed that of the decision re- at 2339. quiring single-member districts in Dal- las and Supreme Bexar upholding Counties.2 The But in finding this court’s Court then remanded this case “for fur- unconstitutional dilution in two multi- proceedings ther in conformity districts, Supreme with the Court opinion of this Court.” opportunity On this remand was afforded the to indi- original plaintiffs cate, unchallenged greater considerably detail than Barnes, supra Graves v. plan Smith, at 718 n. 7. Archer v. 409 U.S. 93 S. (1972). Ct. 34 L.Ed.2d 68 Supreme 2. The summarily Court affirmed our validity conclusion on the of the Senate pri- garner majority in a of the vote precisely Whitcomb, possible in had been party receive mary in order to election demographic factors political and what legislative races finding state nomination. insufficient support would require- particular are marked justify and would therefore access multi-mem- from a single-member ment that candidates ordering of smaller “place” specific run for a ber district racial concentrated tricts which matching greater there is up Since ballot. group make would or ethnic correspond places provision that these population. percentage of the district particular the district sections of reside, must the candidate which I. no function but reduce rule serves first noted con- of head-to-head to a series election emphasis consequent of life on the facts and social tests appears. panel found crucial Nor where it Texas that this racial element understanding operation policy rational state does there exist explaining present Po of multi- in state. use multi-member districts phrase county. vapid con is not a districts in litical access rigid formula, but is fre fined within quently perpetuated Though condi these statewide folkways, by mores, to demon alone are not sufficient tions In this area the customs. multi-mem the invidious effect of strate any dichoto has liberated us from county, any particular districts ber my jure. It of de and de is continuing background facto they provide do necessary minority vot to establish that findings specific positions of on the being legally are disenfranchised. ers minority in the nine chal communities explore permitted to the entire areWe lenged progeny and its districts. White political and to measure its environment general that, given these condi indicate tions, pollutants. Indiana, the state Unlike plaintiffs’ satisfied burden is Whitcomb, under consideration in Texas “aggre by proof of an of the existence one-party historically been a state gate factors,”4 including: (1) re- of history by pattern pockmarked with a minority groups to the stricted access of of racial discrimination that has stunted slating particular par- of candidates participation the electoral and economic nominations; ty (2) the consistent use of the black and brown communities campaign to defeat mi- of racist tactics the life state. The isolation of nority championing candidates or those arising from such Mexican-Americans (3) minority concerns; the indifference discrimination further exacer has been hostility repre- of the district-wide language bated cultural and barriers. minority particularized in- sentatives to system, poll primary The all-white inability ; (4) of minori- terests regis tax, most restrictive voter ty groups representation in to obtain procedures tration in the nation3 have proportion percentage of the to their pattern left behind them a of population. one element district No apathy par continues inhibit finding qua of denial non of a sine ticipation minority groups po present access; all nor must process. addition, litical In cur any given county. In order for a court system, longer rent electoral while no grant however, relief, requested discriminatory flagrantly marred practices factors must have combination these past, many fea retains fencing minority out. the effect of original tures that were found A court must wire and be shown the proceedings to facilitate exclu enough for an ef- of the barbs to make requires sion. Texas that a candidate fective barrier. Smith, F.Supp. (S. McKeithen, supra,

3. See Breare v. 321 4. Zimmer v. 485 F.2d at 1100 D.Tex.1971) ; F.Supp. Smith, Garza v. 320 (W.D.Tex.1971). factors, of these and on Mindful one-third Tract families have 106.02’s apprais “intensely $25,000 of an local basis an annual income between impact $50,000, nearly enjoy dis al” of the multi-member one-fourth an- county, $50,000; we have deter tricts each nual incomes over 98% 2,253 mined seven of the nine chal 54.02, them are white. In Tract lenged family multi-mem districts the families have a mean in- annual deny operates ber $26,825 scheme black family come of mean and a size proc 2.61; access to the brown voters there non-white families county reviewed ess. each We in the tract. contemporary always vista, from a while contrast, family the mean income remembering todays that our are the $4,437 annually in Tract 11 is and the products yesterdays. our Here as family mean size 4.62. one- Over many constitutional thickets has been third of the families in Tract 11 have wisely page history is said that a $3,000. annual incomes of less than logic. worth a volume of black, of that tract 86% brown, and white. Families 10% 4% (HIDALGO A. DISTRICT Tract have a mean income of annual COUNTY) $3,604 and a mean 4.56. Tract 17 size Plaintiffs conceded at trial that brown, black, residents are 95% 1% produce prove were unable to evidence to white; substantial two-place multi-member $3,000 them receive incomes of less than Hidalgo County operates deny any annually. group po- racial or ethnic access to the Twenty-five contain a census tracts process. us, litical theOn record before population black; thirteen more 30% holding there is no basis for a that the are more than tracts black. Seven 75% legislative plan Hidalgo for have or more Mexican-American 30% County guar- violates the constitutional Thus, residents. and brown black protection equal antee of of the laws. populations County are, of Tarrant to a (TARRANT B. DISTRICT 32 COUN- large extent, rather concentrated TY) geographic identifiable areas. entirely is32 contained with- many County, Tarrant like Southern encompasses Tarrant 147 locations, historically gen- has not County’s and a fraction of Tarrant population. to its In the erous population census tracts. total fifties, groups de- citizens’ resisted the 675,368, making neigh- segregation formerly all-white largest remaining legisla- multi-member community borhoods facilities. delegation state; tive district desegregation been a continu- School has represents of nine District 32 ing conflict; source of resistance to Representatives. House of plans implementation of court-ordered Recently, present. prop- persists The district’s is 82% erty developers in affluent white, owners and black, and brown. 12% 6% neighborhoods pre- family have mean endeavored annual income building family low-or moderate- vent priced $11,296, trict and the mean housing areas; group in their size is Deviations from these 3.8. neighborhood many means, pronounced in the Richland Hills however, are 106.02, federal to file suit in court threatened keep tracts. eensus Tract getting “more than the area from example, comprises with a 96 families low-priced hous- annually family its subsidized $40,693 share” mean income of ing.5 especially have family ap- areas Suburban and a size too mean small discouraged pear Nearly set- black families statistics. available Oppose 11, 1973, 4-A, Star-Telegram, Subsidized col. 1: “Suburbs November Ft. Worth Housing”. expect win; they placed him him to una- the recent tling, as evidenced opposition outlying as token to a public on strong slate of one declaration bashed and to black incumbent attract people his be- like town resident city votes for other candi- no and brown slated taxes and there are “no cause money received less from the dates. He nigras”.6 than other candidates coalition on. not confined Racial discrimination expected, and, lost—with an slate evidence establish- to a vocal few. The overwhelming majority of the black vote candidates es, instance, that black very and a small number of votes. white pow- obtain endorsement who Webber, Bobby wealthy black busi- in Tarrant erful coalition labor-liberal nessman, ran for the Democratic nomi- doomed to fail- are nevertheless nation in with the endorsement refusal of rank-and- ure because of the Webber, black, the however, labor-liberal coalition. even a vote for file laborers not a recruit of that coali- unions’ leader- endorsed black Grays tion, and like he received consid- important ships. are Racial factors erably support other- less A whites. recent even in races between —financial group did white than op- wise—from trailed his candidate who campaign financed his candidates. He primarily ponent primary overcame the first he himself. predominantly with funds raised opponent’s lead showing impressive Webber made runoff areas and after white hasty won gained designed runoff, leafletting primary, in the garnered campaign Sev- of the vote. appeal about to white fears “forced” voters’ however, factors, suggest desegregation. his busing eral to achieve school sign is no vot- summary, envi- relative and its success District 32 prepared to ers of in Texas’ “color- Tarrant rons has been no oasis legislature. discrimination;” history elect a black to Web- ful racial apparently progress healed ber eschewed television cam- has recent nor history. paigning Black brown and concentrated resources wounds of his be, advertising been, newspaper continue to in an effort citizens many ignorant in Tar- victims of racial discrimination to leave voters of his County. spent nearly rant color. He three times money in campaign as much opponent, his continuing light In and historical Sehieffer, 24-year Tom old surpris- it is not racism District white; was not an incumbent. Sehieffer ing candidates for that black and brown positions major Webber issues took have met In- office deed, with small success. many that to were attractive white and outlook for black candidates Despite middle-class forts, these ef- voters. generally so that no black ever was bleak ultimately he was unsuccessful. legislature ran for the from District 32 polled among He an enormous time, three until 1968. Since that blacks heavily black voters and brown lost sought Rep- in the House seats indicating in white areas. Rather than ; resentatives none have been successful. relatively that Tarrant is a Grays sought Charles Democratic promising aspir- environment for black (which to nomination election, is tantamount office, experience ants dem- Webber’s Republican since no has ever many that even a onstrates black with House) represented District 32 Angli- money, advantages, much and an important fac- 1968. One local image cized cannot succeed in an at- labor-liberal-minority tions, coali- large legislative race in District 32. tion, Grays. slated He and endorsed slate-makers, however, told was The third black candidate to run dur- ing years he could not win and that did 1968-72 was Charles Gas- ' Star-Telegram, 4r-A, 21, 1973, Key 6. Ft. Worth November 8: “Economics col. to Suburban Housing for Minorities”. kins, politician, however, candidate in tics. A 1972. Gaskins local de- “mythi- group than or even less successful Grays, Webber clared Seventh Street part degree Pre- because black cal.” Yet which the Fort organ- community cinct Council did not endorse Worth Workers business is an opponent political council, him his was well-known ized formal as contrast- Grays, popular. affinity grouping Like Webber and ed ato loose of indi- however, institutions, quan- made a better Gaskins much viduals and is not voting showing required support in black and brown box- tum of evidence predominantly conspiracy white boxes. es than conviction in a criminal case. It sufficient observe that Fort Two brown candidates have in recent Worth businessmen mercantile insti- sought years the Democratic nomination community form tutions in- natural legislative for the seat from District 32. terests that some of them lend their one Ramirez offered himself on Robert support public private, or financial or occasion, placed — and was on the labor- seeking moral—to individuals office. dominated Tarrant la- slate. A undisputed The evidence is that at no group testified bor leader labor community sup- time has the business ported, collectively help “supported him to turn out Chi- otherwise, the can- knowledge cano vote with the full didacy person. of a black or brown we didn’t have a chance win.” On group occasion, another labor impact slate-making dual support refused to Harold Valderas process significant. A Fort Worth la- George opponent his endorsed Richard- leader, testimony bor whose con- was not son, always because Richardson “has troverted, stated that he and other labor good organized been a labor”. friend of representatives leaders met with No Mexican-American candidate has community agreed business in 1962 and securing ever been successful seat group that neither would endorse candi- delegation. in the District 32 opposed group’s who dates the other fa- effect, group vorites. each “conced- organiza- The evidence that two shows ed” some races to other. This inci- tions “slate” or endorse speaks eloquently very dent real other candidates in Tarrant power politi- group of the business aas support by group one or the other impossibility cal force well as the necessary to elect candidate succeeding as a candidate District 32 Representatives. House No candidate support group without the of one or' the history in recent ever been sent other. the House without identification one these political impotence two slates.7 No witness The virtual of Dis- disputed the of a existence labor-liberal trict 32’s minorities has had several ef- regularly Among important coalition re- fects. the most is the cruits, legislative delegation’s candi- interviews and endorses lack of enthusi- disagreement initiating legislation dates. There is some for asm fashioned the “particularized about the nature of so-called “Sev- for the of needs” blacks group, reputedly Among enth Street” a coalition and browns the district. support delegation of businessmen who recruit and issues played which the of in- on behalf local day-care, candidates business indifference are fair experts housing, rights, desegregation, job Two who testified ex- terests. civil pressed opinion prison the that the reform, Seventh discrimination, and wel- well-organized group Although many is and rep- Street a fare reform. powerful County poli- force in Tarrant resentatives voted for such measures as Betty Andujar exceptional many respects: 7. Mrs. victorious case Her ap- recently, though Republican against even Senate peared race she she ran as a a non-in- slate, opponent, on in a neither but she ran cumbent and she was a well-known approx- only figure politics Senatorial district that includes in local of well as the wife imately representative prominent physician. half of respectively. employee giving injured were a bill right 59% 43% registered voters of black compensated for medical care to be 40% registered in those voters of white and the physician choice of his '51% primary; testimony participated in precincts meetings law, open there was of particular turnout was versus mo- black issue was neither 53% 70% general likely election. minority persons. It is white voters ment par- delegation’s support lower for these The effect blacks’ ticipation,9 coupled may with the fact to the alle- be attributed measures register propor- many representatives in smaller giance blacks also overwhelming organized tions, an almost labor. creates the interests of bear Although minority delegation handicap unani- or one voted to a candidate bilingual bill and mously education who commits himself to the interests for a adop- spirals process permitting child interracial minorities. Thus a bill originated endlessly. History powerlessness tion, District passage unresponsive repre- apathy actively for create or worked legislation. unresponsiveness of the dele- A sentatives breeds : city gation apathy apathy, powerlessness for and state sales more voted more minority tax, opposed by unresponsiveness. or- tax vocal those Not representative ganizations. history, voted One who do learn from also holiday against trapped by history, a state the creation of those are who King. honoring repeat Martin Luther it. Dr. condemned to per- significant about observation McKeithen, supra, In Turner v. delegation, formance however, following Fifth found the Circuit fac pertain on to its votes does not in de tors “entitled to consideration” already legislation reached that has claring a multi-member unconstitutional voting stage; failure the consistent po for the of a district drawn election time ef- to devote the members jury Quichita Parish, lice Louisiana: bringing legislation that meets fort continuing past effects of discrimination partic- minority needs the floor. One participation minority on ac delega- striking ularly example tivity ; opportunity minority persons closing prevent failure tion’s participate in the selection of candi Ad- Rehabilitation the Narcotics Addict ; responsiveness dates offi elected facility in Worth for Fort ministration particularized cials to of mi needs lack of funds. nority strength persons; and -the or ten minority powerless- preserv A second result uousness of the state interest form ing in District a most subtle ness 32 is multi-member districts. In District alienation.8 32, past disenfranchisement: we find discrimination and its comparing participation of vestiges exercising continuing Statistics cheek predomi- registered voting, voters in selected minority registration, nantly predominantly candidacy. white powerful black and find interests We precincts “slating” black turn- consulting reveal that in candidates without primary com- representatives out in elections was and without %; pared of 38 minority interests, to a white turnout reference to and we general percentages election find that vir a candidate not slated has long expert 8. A in political active Tarrant elect whoever want to.” they The woman’s County politics recounted incident attitude apparently is shared mem- by many working occurred when she was a voter bers of the district’s community, minority registration campaign. regis- registers offered She to which both in far votes smaller an elderly ter and the majority. black woman woman proportions than the white responded: “It any make doesn’t difference 9. A Tarrant County political testified expert register I whether or whether I vote. the level of participation there, going Those white people are to do whatever registration voting, especially is as low going among want among to anyway. they’re And to browns as blacks. find, whelmingly white, tually hope comprise ap- no of election. We blacks delegations general, past proximately popu- of the district’s 30% community not demonstrated com lation. This sizeable black have largely ghetto representation of minori mitment to the concentrated in areas of Arthur, sig- the lack of access to Beaumont and Port ty interests. This the two county.10 political process the size nificant is enhanced urban centers in the largest 32, ghetto areas, re No resident of in- of District maining which is these deed no multi-member black man or woman from sys part district, Fort dual school of the state. The tem, Worth has been elected to a Parish, county-wide like one in district or Ouachita office since order, only century. under court turn of the abandoned desegregation remains contro school versy County findWe that in the Jefferson County generally. in Tarrant virtually every multi-member district el- as served the Oua Just no black has contributing ement dilution Jury chita Police since Recon govern- minority representative voice in struction, represented Dis black present. Though ment is all of Texas legislature. Texas trict 32 More degree blight has to some suffered the pat over, in there District 32 clear attempts discrimination, racial finding “unresponsiveness,” tern of community the black Coun- Jefferson explicitly court to make declined vestiges ty slavery to eliminate the . in Turner by particular have turbulence, been met McKeithen, supra, animosity, 1963, In Zimmer v. and recalcitrance. In finding Fifth concluded that a black Circuit citizens of Jefferson were group picket that some members had forced to resort to lines in order to to been elected office does foreclose obtain their children’s admission to bearing inquiry municipally into other factors on the sanctioned Southeast constitutionality multi-mem- Texas date, State Fair. Until that same public 32, course, city In ber district. libraries in the of Beau- found, patrons. mont we have addition all other were closed to black As factors, 1967, that black and late newspapers brown candidates the local con- unanimously have been tinued unsuccessful. to list real available estate ac- cording summary, clearly prospec- the desired race of proved buyers. that District works tive passage unconsti- It was after tutionally Rights mi- “cancel minimize” the Civil Act 1964 that nority voting strength according employed by blacks were the Jefferson supra, County government Regester, standards White anything other McKeithen, supra, janitors. Zimmer v. than and Turn- The record sounds mere McKeithen, supra. er v. echoes from Brown v. Board of Educa- tion, U.S. 74 S.Ct. 98 L.Ed. (1954), rising and the decibels or- (JEFFERSON C. DISTRICT 7 COUN- chestrated barely that case are audi- TY) County. Nearly twenty ble Jefferson years after that historic decision the District which contains 90% Independent Beaumont School District population of Jefferson sends a operate continues seven all-black delegation members, of three elected persists busing schools and chil- black trict-wide, Represen- to the House of past neighborhood dren population tatives. The schools attend Jefferson County is black and brown. all-black schools on other side 4%% portions county Since the segregation excluded town. Educational is a fac- from multi-member district are over- tor in county. isolation population 221,314. 10. The 57,871, according of the district Port Arthur to the 1970 115,919 Beaumont has a census. significance po- greater has not acci three-member even Of community upon explain When called position the black dental. litical history candi county’s lack of enthusiasm for black of racial their has been dates, reported to the local labor leaders employment and labor discrimination the local black activity. Ar- AFL-CIO and The Beaumont-Port union support industrialized, community would not heavily with thur area is hostility plants petro-chemical of the racial a black because refineries and membership. predominantly dominating their white the economic scene. Until hiring mid-1960’s, promotion can no doubt but There prevented racially opposition practices plants marked has both were of these relegated motivated, and discour black victories were blacks aged potential from en positions. candidates The union locals were black menial tering separated race, the field. on the basis of also seniority merger, plant after even hostility on The effect of white cam- racial attitudes. reflected the dominant voting paign strategies practices integrated newly The black workers on the three has been well demonstrated placed were at the bottom of the seniori- when occasions black candidates ty ladder. county or offices. run district-wide again In 1964 and A1 Price ran seg gradual elimination of these Democratic nomination for the regated practices, frequently as labor campaigns House. In both he re- Texas brought of court orders the result overwhelming support ceived degree increasing it an racial community but lost race due to black community. hostility in the This bitter strong opposition in white sections particu in the holds ness ranks labor of the district. Elmo ran Willard significance opportunity of lar for the 1966 for and went Commissioner participate in the current dis blacks startling- to defeat down result of representa trict-wide elections for state ly voting patterns. similar Both cam- one-party county. tives. is a Jefferson paigns were marked the use of racist Any group impact desiring to have an areas; tactics white the election political process operate on the must brought deputy of 1966 armed white through party the Democratic machin polls sheriffs to the in the black residen- ery, organized principal labor is county. tial of the sections county party. Democratic force legisla- Those candidates elected to the The endorsement of the local council of not in ture Jefferson while the Committee on Political Education years openly (COPE) recent to the inter- hostile of the AFL-CIO has been char community, ests sizeable black acterized as “tantamount election.” unrespon- have been COPE-supported both insensitive The record shows that seg- particularized sive to the of a needs candidates have suffered defeat in coun population plagued by ty ment of the offi- when district-wide elections private extraordinary personality cial discrimination. conflicts have representatives Although District 7 have had little divided labor vote. the la insti- contact with the or social passes bor committee that community. The people tutions black usually candidates does not solicit Repre- one on District office, State’s witness to run for it does those interview entirely Terry Doyle, sentative un- who have indicated a desire to run and degree segregation aware of prepares then a slate of candidates. No public the Beaumont schools. appeared black man or woman has ever neglect nearly on these slates. This In Dallas this Court found operated constituency one-third of the the multi-member district Longshoremens’ Ass’n, F.Supp. (S.D. See, g., e. v. International United States Tex.1971). deny county minorities access to the Approximately as a whole. 7% process where the district-wide nomina- county’s of the residents are Mexican- tions were controlled white- percentage Americans. The of blacks organ- organization, dominated albeit ranges various Waco census tracts from sought occasionally ization that out Only zero to one nine hundred. of In thirty-two black candidates. Jefferson city census tracts of we are faced less determinative greater population Waco have a black slating body, which a demon- follows than words, 60%; but less than in other 5% policy avoiding input strable from the neighborhoods, Waco community. Dallas, black part, overwhelmingly most white or access to nomination and election of predominantly (Residential fig- black. representatives state came a matter Spanish- ures for or Mexican-American largesse; of white but in ac- persons Jefferson presented surname were not cess comes not at all. We find that the court.) single-member creation of three history Waco’s of racial discrimina- tricts out of the District 7 is es- pervasive tion is no less blatant and participation sential to black in the nom- than that of other areas in In a Texas. representa- ination and election of state referendum in of the voters 81% tives. expressed preference in Waco (McLENNAN D. system DISTRICT 35 segregated, COUN- their school remain TY) majorities large almost as voted for “specific legislation perfecting State District 35 is coterminous with Mc- against intermarriage Laws between city Lennan and includes the persons negroes white [sic]” Waco as well as some rural areas. The interposition illegal “the use of to halt population 147,533 district’s and two federal encroachment.”12 In that same represent members it in the House year, daily newspapers one of Waco’s Representatives. following passage, ran the com- as a through The Waco, Brazos River runs mentary, straight but rather as a news dividing city about one-sixth from story enjoin about the state’s efforts to remainder. Waco’s black the activities of the NAACP: heavily concentrated in the small sec- testimony The sworn and evidence neighbor- tor east Some river. completely take out of the NAACP as- immediately hoods west of the river pect crusading zeal. Not without predominately have also become or heav- does reason News Columnist Landrum ily black in the last decade. The most identify it as the National Association city central of the areas contain the Agitation People. for the of Colored substantial concentrations of Mexican- population. figures American repre- Census NAACP the South does not movement, Negro 1970 show that black citizens consti- sent a approximately popula- tute change practically every of the move to 20% city tion of the of the Waco racial mores the section has come News-Gitieen, August 2, 1956, Legislature, local, Waco at 1: State and district Segregation.” officials, boards, “Voters bureaus, departments Demand doc- “interposition” apparently system trine of . . . to maintain a dual school long people theoretical sory brainchild of a advi- as the of this and the lo- appointed by it”; adoption committee Governor Shiv- cal communities desire and the ers in 1955 in the wake of Brown v. Board of a constitutional ille- amendment to “halt gal of Education. Report committee’s document federal encroachment.” “individual, personal rejection Legal Legislative recommended: Subcommittee compliance merely Advisory Segregation with what the latest Texas Committee on expression judicial opinion; Schools, September refusal ev- the Public ery judgment (available individual Library Legisla- to observe from Texas State party .”; which he Division). was not a . . “offi- tive Reference non-action, may cial action as the case groups m outside, the labor has been directed like business from County. in Tarrant financed Tarrant Yet as the outside and from County, in McLennan has ever . . . NAACP is no black the outside. legislative wrong sociologically in its stand and been successful in a bid for a Indeed, country, every no black In a free seat. McLennan its activities. personal legislature; person one wit- entitled to his ever run for prejudices had ever even as to his so-called civil ness testified that none rights.13 a There considered such race. have city’s city black councilmen two eyidence revealed a cu- Uncontradicted history, currently of whom sits on one political past: rious incident Waco’s however, councilmen, the council. Black City The Waco elections were Council apparently have not acted as effective by conducted for the first time wards spokesmen minority inter- black and In the coun- a black ran for One of them was elected in a race ests. against from one of and was near- cil ly, the wards by black, another and lost a quite, but not successful. Immediate- margin polling of three to one in black ly office, after the new took councilmen places heavily won areas. but white change they by acted resolution Thus, he elected and owed was whites voting system at-large, council back them, a debt to rather than in order to the threat of a black alleviate people. black Two Mexican-Americans at-large system council This member. have run for the council but neither was in effect. remains successful.14 desegregation Controversy over Although no evidence that there is given rise to several schools has Waco County delegations past McLennan litigation, still of which is one rounds contrary to often voted the wishes or- are a few black in the courts. There minority representa- citizens, former ganizations Waco, have not supported the eco- tive who the needs of influencing lo- met much success with nomically disadvantaged generally, testi- politics. evidence that There cal any legisla- fied that he could not recall they must feel that officials when Waco vindicating specifically tion aimed minority representatives consult groups minority that he or interests of issue, they community choose on some origi- had other 35 members hand-picked whose blacks committee of the McLennan nated or carried. Thus strongly contrast views do not delegation County not have a does majority. In ad- dominant views of the legislative initia- record of affirmative organizations indigenous dition, black particularized tives on behalf misrepresented misquoted and are minority persons in the dis- needs of their credi- media, the extent that trict. among bility their constituents both general, cli- destroyed. others is past history of All of these factors — so un- mate McLennan continuing resulting in discrimination politi- aggressive friendly black toward minority political participation, lack agreed activity all that the witnesses cal factors, geographic demographic is one mood of black Waconans minority can- bids of failure of few discouragement. apathy, despair, representatives’ present didates, particularized does not have lack of commitment McLennan persua- present sponsor groups candidates that slate and needs of minorities — place filled News-Ciiizen, is often on the council 1956 at that one October 13. Waco reason This is further a black. NAACP.” 7: “Texas Suit Uncovers city council two blacks to the the election of voting run at-large city that a black could does not tend to show council 14. The county-wide legislative successfully system requirement candi- retains require- district, places is no residence since there must reside dates the various holding particular surprising Thus, seat. ment for wards. is not community pattern minimi- cancellation and not consulted sive strength. voting support question par- selection and zation of striking legislature, for the element McLennan ticular candidates most despair Indeed, testimony however, other is the absolute offices. county’s community apathy fre- indicated that the black and minority felt most of up- quently learns decisions on the There was testimo- residents. coming ny very particular vote in elections from black waiters who that blacks meetings exception numbers, serve at the where such conclu- small being candi- sions are reached or races in which a black is a discussed. representative “It A former said: date. This initial isolation has been runs, any difference who doesn’t make deepened geographic the and social going get they they feel not much are separation of the black and Mexiean- other, way or so out of one the American communities from the domi- just voting.” quit Anglo county. nant section of Near- ly minority all of all Thus that in District 35 in we find residents Austin live persuaded Highway the Fifth on the of the factors that east side Interstate churches, clubs, Zimmer Turner and the The in 35. civic athletic Circuit Supreme Regester present teams, and are other social institutions of entirely multi- in full The use of a area are almost measure. black or member district operates McLennan Mexiean-American. Access to the social minority Anglo community, cancel or minimize institutions of the strength voting development con- which cannot survive is crucial to the necessary the information stitutional attack. and contacts County, a career in Travis COUNTY) (TRAVIS E. DISTRICT 37 is ghettoes available to the inhabitants comprises all Travis and barrios of Austin. County. population It has of some a pervasive This isolation from the dom- 300,000, 250,000 is contributed of which community inant only has affected not capital. City Austin, the State minority the ultimate success of candi- delegation to the Travis sends a of four polls, willing- dates at the but also the Representatives. popula- House of The opportunity ness and of blacks and Mex- county approximately tion of the 20% iean-Americans to offer themselves brown and Yet no black black. public service. No black has ever Mexiean-American has ever been elected sought the Democratic nomination for legislature to the Texas from the Travis legislature from Travis County multi-member district. gar- two Mexican-Americans have County legislative Travis electioneer- sup- nered sufficient financial and other ing controlled, is not is the case port attempt the race. Both of these counties, Tarrant and one participation Jefferson minority efforts at slate-making groups. or However, two formal process despite elective overwhelming met with defeat party the Democratic is the support from black and continuing significant political one following campaigns brown voters county,15 force and a coalition appeals marked to the racial fears capítol Austin businessmen and state and hostilities of the sizeable white ma- lobbyists generally jority. racially controlled The same oriented tac- party local The mechanism. black primary tics have been used in cam- against Anglo Mexiean-American paigns minorities those candidates county represented thought are not in this domi- identify minority with inter- minority group. minority began nant The leaders of the ests. When candidates Although single Anglo entirely Republican par- a individual Democratic and the years ty twice in continuing, recent been elected to the does not function as a viable politics. Texas House from Travis on the force local Republican ticket, present delegation city mately 147,722 people two elections and sends some success achieve city representatives Repre- board and House Austin for school early 1950’s, Approximately sentatives. county’s those bodies council in the 7.4% approxi- pro- population is black election method. altered their mately brown, making changed a total one which cedure was 17.33% city-wide, population ran with those all candidates accumulating 24.73%. winning highest bulk totals black brown quadrant major- place system resides northeast election, to a with district, portion predomi- ity requirement procedure iden- vote —a nately population spilling over brown scheme. tical to quandrant por- into northwest and a operated off serious to shut This device predominantely popula- challenges tion of black until late black or brown extending quan- Although currently tion into the southeast man black 1960’s. drant. city the Austin council and a serves on place occupies on the black woman Formerly ranching town, a small Lub- board, more ac- school both victories bock, city principal located within largesse of curately Anglo attributed to the 75, exploded period District growth significant community than to beginning at the the twen- participation black process.16 convergence century tieth with the of groups. Anglo two cot- The first were Texas, farmers, largely representatives ton from from East elected the district, Southern, County which introduced the rural multi-member Travis uniformly partic- culture. The second were the Mexiean- while not hostile to the minority residents, Americans, con- who worked railroad ularized needs of struction the de- and maintenance until have evidenced an to the se- indifference velopment farming. the of cotton As confronting problems rious constitu- this industry developed, cotton significant Mexiean- ency. especially This is migratory field minority Americans became pressing one of the that most coming workers, first from Mexico concerns, agen- New equal employment in the early 1900’s, and Texas com- government in Aus- cies of state located ing again in later waves 1950’s. tin, peculiarly susceptible to ameliora- growing cot- With mechanization of representatives. But tion state farming 1960’s, ton in the 1950’s and regard only movement in has come migratory began the former workers minority representatives from elected up permanent take residence in Lubbock. single-member from other districts deep Thus, not unlike the blacks parts of the state. South, in Lub- the Mexican-American every virtually find that We factor bock was received most of present in the Bexar Dallas and Anglo population dominant a fel- not as multi-member is identifiable districts being, low human but—in the words justifica- There no District 37. can be one historian —as holding acceptable tion for our Travis species implement of farm that which unconstitutional mysteriously spontaneously comes tricts to the north and south. being into coincident with the matur- (LUBBOCK F. COUN- DISTRICT 75 ing up- cotton, requires no TY) keep special during consideration period usefulness, Lubbock no which includes needs its approxi- protection elements, has a from the city victory explained by largely 16. The council must be attribut school board part ran as fact the black ed to the held on candidate fact the election was group day following of a endorsed the dominant busi of Dr. the assassination community. testimony represent King ness of all Martin those Luther and therefore knowledgeable voting County politics ordinary on in ed a Travis certain distortion patterns. dicated that a black election of woman harvested, brown, only crop has lie school are about students when graduates forgotten eighteen Mexican-Ameriean into the limbo vanishes Independent things season Dis- the next harvest Lubbock School —until college degree, trict have received a rolls around.17 pop- the entire fewer than brown .3% residing in Lub- and browns Blacks college gradu- county ulation in the from,18 long County have suffered bock public very ates. few of Since from, the effects suffer and continue to speak Span- school teachers are able to dual school A of racial discrimination. ish, testing classify the verbal used ignored system, a 1970 officially until Mentally Re- students for Educational order, see United States federal court (EMR) tarded classes is unreliable District, Independent School Lubbock disproportionate number of Mexican- coupled F.Supp. (D.Tex.1970), assigned Americans are to those classes. language barrier, made obvious Although Spanish speaking significant impact on the education grounds school until 1968— —forbidden Approxi- level of Mexican-Americans. permitted, now enthusiasm bilin- mately the Mexican-Americans 60% gual may inadequate: education eighth drop before the out school program director of the Lubbock high grade, finish than less Independent speaks School District Although pub- Spanish. one-fourth school. Kibbe, in Texas great Latin Americans of field laborers seasonal 1946), (University Press, of New Mexico demand for labor. This necessitated Guzman, system Ameri- keep cited Baird and Mexican which would the laborers mo- bile, away perma- cans in Political Subculture Lubbock: but still not drive them (un- nently. Behavior Mexican American Political published portion project Although early research Mexican Americans University, Lubbock, Texas, pre- perceive any Texas Tech discrimination, failed to overt Meeting slowly developed by sented at the 1973 Annual their alienation was Rocky incipient process Mountain Associa- aspects Political Science in almost all Laramie, Wyoming, April 27, 1972). tion, Though they of their lives. were served restaurants, they they in knew that could history only 18. For an building. excellent of discrimination sit at the rear of the Their against Tijerina, Americans, a Mexican see children were not in allowed the town History giving Anglo of the Mexican Americans in Lub school which was chil- (thesis bock partial Texas in dren an They submitted American education. re- requirements cotton-picking fulfillment of the for a mained in work not because degree they in propensity Master of Arts at Texas Tech had a natural for life on University, Lubbock, Texas, August, 1973). farm, proposed, as has been but be- Tijerina they accepted nearly opportunity Thus the tion, total lack of any opportunity partici- little if to part on the of pate this small Mexican-Amer- political process leading in the to participate polit- ican legislators. in the Thus, election of state process ical is clear. Mexican-American has ever run in district-wide race, and the state’s wit- (EL G. DISTRICT 72 PASO COUN- only ness could recall one Mexican- TY) American who had ever been elected public years office in comprises the last ten which most of —a pre- population constable ap- Justice of the Peace El Paso has a of proximately 297,770 cinct. people Political in the Mexi- awareness and sends community generally. representatives can-American is four to the of House low; only Representatives. Approximately could name of one 12% 56.87% only representatives, state county’s population and could of the and is brown 4% Although name approximately black; their state senator. vot- the com- 2.8% recently averaged er turnout population more bined El Paso 59.67%. registered than vote, of those nestled the western corner 40% only politi- have ever attended a of Texas on the Mexican border and ex- 16.8% meeting only along cal southeasterly and have ever tends direction 11.3% political campaign. River, long worked in More- the Rio Grande much like a over, county greatest a former Democratic chair- tail. The concentration of Mex- por- lies the southern The barrio is an area of economic de- ican-Americans county housing pression Mexi- and the and tion of the follows substandard and county plumbing top Nearly from the of facilities. twice can border county. many tip barrio, approxi- families or southward mately 24%, poverty live below the level barrio, referred to as the Often compared El the rest of Paso with along strip con- River Rio Grande County. Approximately bar- 17% county’s slightly less than half tains housing plumbing rio ties, units lack facili- but almost two-thirds total approximately contrasted with 2% population. Over the Mexican-American county; rest of for the and val- county people in who 80% average ap- ue of the house is barrio reside attended school never $10,000 $3,000 proximately about —or report by the United The 1970 barrio. county-wide average. than the less Health, Education, Department of States reveals that El Paso and Welfare Although Mexican-Americans progress eliminating little had made approximately constitute of the 52% system. time of At the the dual school finding county’s population, this alone Mexican- report, over 60% inquiry does into other foreclose fac at- public still American school students indicating tors that Mexican-Americans racially tended identifiable schools—that opportunity in District 72 have less than is, black schools excess 90% partici other residents in the report population. fur- or brown This pate processes and to decisions ther revealed that board school legislators First, elect of their choice.20 regarding renovation construction and only be Mexican-Americans constitute drawing of attend- facilities registered tween 20 to vot 38% maintaining had the ance zones effect ; number, only ers and of this to35 promoting system of educa- dual registra actually vote. The level of low integrated tion, the few largely tion and turnout is due schools, so-called the introduction of lingering intimidation of Mexican-Amer ability tracking practices groupings and repeal poll icans since tax and re segregation. had retained effects of registration measures, strictive as well report the school further noted that language presents as to a barrier actively recruit district had failed to problems. obvious communication More faculty administra- black and brown over, intimidation of Mexican-Americans personnel, that of with the result tive replaced under law has with more employed the dis- the 48 counselors trict, only For ex subtle forms demoralization. none were 4 were brown during registration ample, drives voter black; librarians, none the 27 county 1960’s, in the late tax-asses brown; that of were principals, black although sor, him a Mexican-American and one 8 were brown self, attempted place unreasonable emphasis curriculum black. deputy-voter limits on the number according varied, report, from to this registrars persons ac often refused Anglo predominately predominately registration voter He cess to the books. schools, that registration Mexican-American so accept voter also declined college preparation by emphasized former unless mailed cards were training. by registrant personally and the latter vocational submitted figure strength 19. to earlier was referred diluted Mexican-Americans 56.87% County adjusted though they constitut- to eliminate from consideration in Bexar even population, resid- a Fifth the estimated Mexican ed argument recently ing County permanent rejected in El aliens. Circuit a similar Paso people involving 12,884 parish rural a Relying population. 20. affirm- a Zimmer Me- on the Court’s black 58.7% Keithen, supra. in ance of the district court’s determination Regester, voting supra, White v. that registrant. Thus, rejected any example, he rio. race For in a recent for depu Senate, submission, either mail or a the State two Mexican-American registration ty-voter registrar, represent- candidates, forms both former state atives, Furthermore, bulk form. a number in faced each the runoff other large county employers in the denied for the lived senate Both outside seat. registrars barrio; em Santiesteban, voter access to their and Tati many ployees, winner, previous whom are Mexican- was endorsed in- during American, cumbent, lunch or other Anglo, hours an chose not who employee breaks. run. Second, fifty legisla- of the different Fifth, County delegation the El Paso County tors elected in Paso El since responsive particu- has not been to the 1886, only have four been Mexican- larized needs of Mexican-Americans. A Republican Americans. Both point Owen, case is Frank a witness County the Democratic Chairman admit- state, represent- for the who was a State particularly racism, ted that so-called ative from 1950 to sena- 1954 and State large “whisper played campaigns,” through tor from 1954 Owen tes- part in the defeat of Mexican-American sought actively sup- tified he candidates. One of the state’s witness- port Mexican-Americans his es, a El Mexican-American active in against repeal poll voted races but political campaigns, Paso testified that, tax. He further testified other in his view racism had lessened ad- teaching Spanish than the in’the low- only year mitted for last the race grades school, er think he could of no mayor a Mexican-American lost to an legislation relating proposed he to the Anglo racially-based of a cam- because particularized needs of Mexican-Ameri- paign. The Mexican-American cans. characterized as “un-American” his Finally, campaign a candidate’s ex- opponent participation his because of penses county-wide in a or district-wide organizations such Mexi- Chicano as the County substantially in El Paso race are Organization, Youth an can-American higher than those for race in the political group. activist single-member smaller, districts, such as Third, although slating process ex- County pre- one of the Commissioner’s legislative races, very strong for ists legis- cincts. for the Unlike candidates slating oper- process and successful has lature, candidates for one of the at-large city for ated for elections not, Commissioner’s seats have nearly twenty years responsible and past, expensive relied on television cov- for the success of Mexican-American erage. probably This difference slating candidates at level. This contributed, part, to the least com- group, group an informal of business- parative success of Mexican-Americans men, usually one or chooses two Mexi- races Commissioner. can-Americans com- business While four Mexican-Americans munity. group very has been suc- representative, have been elected State losing cessful, mayor only two races for seventeen elected Com- twenty years. in the last At governing Court, missioners’ board present, mayor, example, iswho county. Anglo major an and the owner of food considerations, view these we chain, was elected on a two slate with persuaded the Mexican-Ameri- Mexican-Americans —one a home devel- residing op- cans have less District 72 oper agent. other insurance portunity than other residents Fourth, none of Mexican-Ameri- participate district to in public office, processes cans elected to lo- legislators whether and of their to elect legislative, or cal have lived in bar- choice.

658 District, lo- Independent (NUECES School COUN- Christi 48 H. DISTRICT TY) County, Mexican- cated within Nueces jure subjected and de Americans to were encompasses most 48, which segregation school de facto and a dual population of County, has a of Nueces system in violation of the Fourteenth 220,056; the district approximately Specifically, district Amendment. representatives to the House elects three court that concluded Representatives. Approximately 43.- of county’s population is brown of the real 58% its school district has [the] dual black; approximately and men; is, 4.6% in that roots the minds of minority population is total system 48.22%. to an- the failure of the school popu- The bulk the Mexican-American of imbalancing ticipate and correct por- to lation confined the southwest developing. is of The court was corridor tion of the district and to a opinion the firm administrative running northeasterly direction. in draw- the school decisions board city Christi, Corpus principal Within ing locating boundaries, new its gener- district, in the this latter area is schools, building ren- new schools ally simply referred to “the corridor”. ovating predomi- schools in the old Negro parts nately living Nearly and Mexican of the families third town, flex- providing elastic exists on a level in- corridor system subjective, level, only ible transfer poverty come while below being Anglo resulted in children some of the of the the rest families 7% ghetto, or “corri- county Ap- allowed to avoid subpoverty level. live at the bussing schools, by dor” some proximately [sic] corridor homes 11% students, providing op- one or more plumbing. lack some or all average tional transfer zones which resulted of a in the corridor value house Anglos being Negro and able to avoid approximately $7,000, approximate- or schools, county-wide not allow- Mexican-American $4,000 ly less than the Negroes ing average. or Mexican-Americans Anglo schools, option going level of the corridor education extraordinarily large by spending lags of the resi residents behind money in- sums tensifying which resulted portions of the coun dents the other segre- perpetuating a ty. Although the corridor contains assign- gated system, by dual school persons approximately one-fourth of the ing Negro and Mexican-American years age older, it contains 25 disparate these ratios to teachers persons 85y2% have com of such who failing segregated schools, and further pleted schooling More whatsoever. Negro employ sufficient number over, only per approximately 3% teach- school and Mexican-American ers, college living in the sons corridor have failing majori- provide education, approxi compared with ty-to-minority rule, were, re- transfer mately the coun in other areas gardless explanations re- of all ty. Corpus Inde Cisneros v. Christi gardless expressions good in- of all pendent F.Supp. District, 599 School 324 tentions, to, did, main- calculated (D.Tex.1970), modi part, affirmed system; promote tain and a dual school part, and remanded, F.2d 142 fied (5th Corpus Independent Cir. held that Mex Christi 1972), the court Cisneros v. F.Supp. supra, District, an identifia ican-Americans constituted School Corpus ble ethnic class 617-620.21 court, Although 21. After remand dif indicated some district the district court desegre judge, noting grant motion, ferent reluctance it did so in that no gation plan sensitivity yet Corpus “seriously order not effect offend the Independent District, appellate judges.” Christi v. Cor consid Cisneros School plaintiffs’ pus Independent provide transporta District, ered Christi motion to School electing F.Supp. (S.D.Tex.1972). tion for those students to avail majority-to-minority themselves of transfers. years, attempt by The United Commission on Civ- for a States number of Rights study il in a “Mexican- second entitled Mexican-American in 1952 to gain Americans in the Public Southwest,” a seat on the Schools board motivated ra- reported April opposition. calling group, cial One such many boards, time Texas school at the themselves Friends of Our Public urged report, Schools, its refused to enforce the voters to consider that against compulsory state attendance law Now, many past, years our Mexican-American children order to Latin American friends have had one forcing large avoid numbers of them to Board, of their own race on the School Anglo attend school with students. One frankly agreed by —as is all fair authority County school in Nueces thinking people should have. quoted say saying “The trustees ‘We However, this Latin American many have too Mexicans [in school] (2) years member still has two up now. Don’t the Mexican enroll- build serve on term, his current and natu- ” Accompanying ment.’ this racial dis- rally thought it was the that our Lat- history crimination in education is a in American friends would make no other forms of discrimination in Nueces attempt put an additional member including County, to sell refusal time,- on the Board at School —(cid:127) homes to Mexican-Americans because certainly specific pur- and pose not for the covenants, restrictive the maintenance of attempting expe- to defeat an separate wards for Mexican-Americans Anglo-American rienced for a hospitals, and the maintenance of second term. But such does not seem separate record-keeping procedures for case, to be the for in the March 17th Corpus Mexican-Americans issue of publica- the Latin-American Department Depart- Christi Police designates tion “La Verdad” which it- Safety ment of Public as well as the De- Organ self as the official of the GI partment of Public Welfare. (headed by Forum Dr. Hector P. Gar- cia) page there appeared, on the first analysis As in our of District strong publication, of such endorse- comprises which of El most Paso Coun- Phillips ment of Oscar Mexican- [a finding ty, the total American as a candidate candidate] in Nueces is 48.22% Board, imploring for the all School and that since the Nueces Latin-Amerieans to cast a vote for delegation Representa- to the House of him. tives has included least one Mexican- We feel that it most unfortunate every one, American term does when a few members of race inquiry foreclose our other into consid- gain, step step, seek to control of indicating erations Mexican-Ameri- public institutions, our especially cans, blacks, oppor- as well as have less public such control of our free schools. tunity than the other residents participate political Shortly attempt after this the Mexi- processes legislators community and to elect can-American to elect a sec- choice. One Board, such consideration is the ond member of the School significant part played by racially changed moti- board the method of election to campaign early majority place system. vated tactics. In the Corpus 1950’s school board elections Similar tactics have continued in re- plurality Christi were conducted on a years. cent In a 1962 election for Re- basis, “single voting permit- shot” gents College, Del Mar located system ted. Under this Mexican-Ameri- “single-shot” Nueces in which cans were able to elect one voting Mexican- permitted, was still four former representative American on the school Regents members the Board of circu- Although presence board. of one purportedly lated an discourage advertisement voting Mexican-American on racially the school board motivated had urging been tolerated the white voters to “vote like Americans”. Although clearly- guished appeal process. more from the electoral although attempts Thus, of earlier than the Nueces worded dele- gation Representatives years, the intent is clear: the House of was used as a ple, dependent bors, Inc., certain had 1971. ease, Similarly subtle tactics were used in a Corpus refusing will who has a Latin name. This Mar some Regents Mexican Inevitably, self-imposed avowed over a term of are ancestry. gation in this area. receive the most votes will are [Single-shot voting] city heightened ^[*] On see group Anglos. four candidates. pit College un-Democratic. Mexican-Americans. Christi Anglo ‘single-shotting’ process, in use council Saturday Cisneros v. purpose ^[*] in a letter circulated School descent to race pending to vote for styled The three candidates organization Del Mar voters are lead the The fourth racial tension in the city segregation. election, campaign ploy ^[*] against District, years, we are process, if school council public Corpus electing Concerned -X- way is un-American College. It has culminated Three of race. noted with * * * retaliating set desegregation is of Mexican supra, office. race is, ^[*] Christi For elect citizens of up continued, And Del- candidate prior desegre- in Already against Neigh- elected. for the which exam- There -X- three them city, fact, May who re- In- for to original to Mexican-Americans and sion even from other empathy with the Mexican-American: vor of certain that need to those needs without cific attention other areas to take Moreover, gation, his are gle member specific specific tion of other constituents. As that cans Truan, a Mexican-American who was re-elected this electoral representatives sentative Truan has included at least one Mexican-Amer- comparable elected of Mexican-Americans. ican in response less fortunate than others attend input although although problems necessary order to sponsor, interests in every interest propose in well Representative parts legislative to the districts] representative in other members of his dele- behalf success does be solved he my term proposals I feel so as accommodate like put of the that he dilute much proposed such time other particularized away having Mexican-Americans, it, helping people of Mexican-Ameri- myself that have will success state, legislation would “I think it [sin- among many one since representatives strongly from the normally may legislation Truan noted not reflect a to dilute significance this state.” Carlos vote in fa- allow for in terms so testified on occa- opposi- Repre- as an about needs lack that spe- my F. spect to one candidate that really appreciate You can’t the value you bilingual education have unless vigorously Dr. Hector has been Garcia speaking physically for abused campaigning nephew, for A. his J. spo- language your parents have “Tony” Canalas, Party People’s ken. you candidate for Place re- 6. As will hearing call, having in the first held before fully appreciate not You can’t Judge Seals, Dr. testified you Garcia had food on the table unless against support Plaintiffs, of the you have experience. And so if support legislation School push opportunity to bussing

proposition stamp program creating [sic] the food going push school children across district. you state-wide, legislation. specific determining A second consideration Rep- Finally, disclosed evidence process to the lack access prior his much of Truan lost resentative support the extent to which Mexican-Americans because the election of 1972 in- denied in Nueces have been stemming his Anglo resentment legislative put process, distin- to the relating district, mini- proposals in-' the flotorial in order to voting strength approxi- mize the terests of Mexican-Americans. mately in that 5500 blacks who reside County Mexican-Ameri- Thus Nueces tract. presently, and have been cans are intensely bitter, ra- past, victims of supported If this claim is strategy. cially campaign motivated evidence, there is no doubt the prompted sub- are the These tactics may appropriate court order relief. Anglo posed to certain stantial threat may respect Whatever the law be with near-majori- organizations political by a politically gerrymandering motivated community with ty Mexican American persons to insure the election of of a good relatively registration and voter particular political party, gerrymander strategy not suc- turnout. When ing minimizing purpose for the of the cessful, the Mexican-American who political voting power of blacks is must race successful a district-wide violation of the fifteenth amendment. legislative support mea- of dilute his Lightfoot, 339, Gomillion v. 364 U.S. 81 particular interest to Mexican- sures of Taylor 125, (1960); S.Ct. L.Ed.2d 110 5 losing re- run risk of Americans and the (2d v. Education, Board of F.2d 294 36 any such measures election as a result of 1961); Cir. v. United States support. he The result which does Texas, F.Supp. (E. 1043, 321 1051-1052 the Mexican-American D.Tex.1970); Baggett, F. Sims 247 op- population have less in District 48 Supp. (M.D.Ala.1965). 96, 104-105 The portunity in the than other residents carefully court has considered the evi participate district plaintiffs dence submitted the with legislators processes and to elect respect to their claim and has concluded choice. County that Galveston and flotorial Dis unconstitutionally trict 17 have been (GALVESTON I. DISTRICT gerrymandered attempt in an to mini COUNTY) voting power mize the blacks Cen sus Tract 1219. containing County, the cit- Galveston City, consti- of Galveston and Texas perhaps ies District 17 is not so uncouth legislative tuted a through appearance two-member city as was the of Tuske- plaintiffs do gee, Alabama, the 1960’s. The prior immediately the of a mul- Lightfoot, not contend that existence supra. Gomillion v. It does presently denies, or however, peculiarities. ti-member district have its It in- denied, minority past citizens portions County cludes Chambers County politi- access to the County roughly Galveston Harris north of Galves- revealed, process. cal The census claiming ton but rather than however, of the northern-most census tracts Galveston county 20,000 approximately (all in ex- County predominantly was of which are white), cess of the number that constitutes an City it curls down into Texas district; plan gathers ideal two-member adopted five urban census tracts Legislative Redistricting by the well as the Bolivar Peninsula. In five of 20,000 Board in County 1971 removed Galveston the Galveston tracts chosen for from 17, residents multi-member District inclusion in District total there placed them in District a flotori- sixth, of 17 blacks. Tract including al district all of Chambers there are 5500 blacks who live County County. portions very City. of Harris center of Texas Tract 1219 respect With 20,000 citizens, to the reallocation these leadership is the source of much allege community black in Galveston Redistricting “ger- plan County. Board was Yet at those 5500 black rymandered” (or legisla- run) so as to remove Galveston voters vote must census tract 1219 from the Gal- ture blacks con- population, which place veston district and stitute less than of the of Gal- issue before it at this time and to dis- than County remainder with rather pose attorneys’ of the fees at matter of veston .22 necessary a later time when all testimony court before explic- is available. court evidence Legisla- regarding intention of the just itly is no reason finds that there designing Redistricting Board tive order, delaying entry today’s that of a mem- current District 17 was every in- to make the but rather reason delegation ber judgment appealable stant final County, Representative Ed Galveston respect to all of issues consid- Tract 1219 Harris. He testified that Accordingly, ex- ered herein. pressly the court intentionally removed to thwart entry judgment directs strength growth of black pursuant to herein Federal Rule of Civil Although neighborhood.23 54(b). Procedure ac- court has some reservations about expert cepting opinion aas the of one finding, al- III. for the evidence basis its ready lends circumstantial described CONCLUSION Moreover, support the to his conclusion. century nearly It has been attempt impeach defendants made to since the enactment of testimony the Fourteenth any his or offer evidence and Fifteenth Amendments we and still suggesting permis- their own some more anguish calling cries of hear for more composi- for the sible rationale district’s tomorrows and en mananas before the Accordingly, the court that finds tion. forcement of electoral design these constitution of District 17 an the impermissible constitutes implores al mandates. The pursu- that gerrymander racial present event the we find the multi Lightfoot, supra, v. ant Gomillion unconstitutional, member scheme deprivation works of the constitutional legislature permitted be rights time draw Census black residents of given the new se boundaries. We have Tract 1219. alternative, rious consideration compelling but have concluded that the II. present constitutional infirmities sev plaintiffs requested Certain have en of these and the districts considerable attorney’s award of in this case. fees delay necessary legislative time for Although contesting the defendants are require single- adopt action we award, appropriáteness of such an plans upcoming member district for the they stipulated parties have with certain Johnson, 1974 elections. Connor See toas reasonableness of submitted 690, 1760, 402 U.S. 91 S.Ct. 29 L.Ed.2d expenses. schedules of fees and Other (1971); Adams, 268 Swann v. U.S. 383 parties requesting attorneys’ who fees 210, 86 15 S.Ct. L.Ed.2d 707 indicated stipulations enter into similar would (1966); Barnes, F.Supp. Graves v. 343 defendants, with how- (W.D.Tex.1972), norm, 736 aff. sub ever, yet done have so. Regester, White v. 412 U.S. 93 S.Ct. (1973). 2332, 37 L.Ed.2d 314 is, operating course, The court un- legislature der initially time constraint since the deadline The re- considered filing impend- districting original for opinion races is The 1971. ing. Accordingly, court, indicating the court has decided of this the criteria major to render a final decision on the which state’s multi-member districts county’s approxi- ing 22. composition county The black the ethnic mately 33,314, about or of the total. a whole for inclusion another district. delegation plan The submitted Representative 23. Harris further testified Legislative Redistricting Board, County pro- delegation the Galveston rejected posed plan Board in favor of the group current that would have drawn 20,000 plan. Galveston reflect- residents judged, the court at time to be issued in Janu- declines were testimony injunctive ary us affirmative before to issue other 1972. The subsequent plaintiffs at favor of relief in spect with re- efforts indicates single- system Instead, adopting a to Districts statewide of by hereby ac- the court were blocked declares member districts representatives present plan of some and can- tions current unconstitutional districts, stand, every multi-member not legislature that the confidence legislature remedy will aided sentiment undertake to simply could the feder- sit back “let constitutional deficiencies the earliest stay legislature possible our do it.” we to al courts date. Were Should now, single-member 1, 1975, July however, hand districts would fail before to act implemented grant elec- required not be before the 1976 will this court af- tions. black and Mexican-American relief. firmative minorities the seven counties would emphasize holding of un- We fenced out the state remain constitutionally in area the Galveston processes years. Not three another districting racially is limited to the mo- legisla- January until would a tivated removal of Tract Census entirely ture elected under constitu- from the Galveston district. plan years tional convene. Six would do not contend that began passed its since the state multi-member scheme in Galveston di- redistricting. We task constitutional legislature vote, the black lutes and the legislative do not believe that redistrict- under obligation, constitutional of ing subject perhaps dec- should be course, to divide Galveston into of ade with a minimum of deliberation single-member districts. mobility. not the We do believe that forest has Therefore, reluctance, trackless, a been with but with and at the end of the hope trail firm conviction that such essary nec- we to a action is we come clearing, rays for the of order to the vindication constitu- observe of rights, society. adopt plans append- tional the a true democratic we Without the opinion.24 opportunity groups minority In the of ed to this procedure line with to ex- press political original preferences, hopes, their followed order democracy case, aspirations, equities of would transition be- majoritarian during perverted come dictate that into a to- election to founding Representatives' Texas House of be talitarianism. Our fathers during majoritarian gov- were held Dis- conscious that a 1974 no candidate in 7, guarantee 32, 35, 48, ernment must 37, tricts be 72 and 75 shall political required single-member process. access to the The cir- reside system culatory repre- that he or our democratic socie- she seeks to ty provision sent. The cannot tolerate an ethnic enforcement of the embolism. requiring of the Texas Constitution such enjoined year. residence will be for that Judge Jr., WOOD, H. JOHN must, course,

The candidates be resi- (dissenting). dents of the multi-member dis- Forewarned, by but undaunted our trict which smaller districts original judicial foray political into the have been carved. jungle years ago in two Graves v. upon In view of the time constraint (W.D.Tex. Barnes, F.Supp. 704 complexity the court and the of remod- 1972), again of this Court elling such a dis- house of cards as the legislative reap- sallies forth another tricting scheme in and around Galveston portionment Contrary my expedition. adjoining adopting single-member districts In tricts these multi- plans seven Legislature, member established the Texas districts the Court disturbed none boundaries between dis- those challenger carry outset, Panel, must At the I do not on the travelers fellow proving multimember jurispru- burden scythe of the recent find the unconstitutionally operate through to di- path districts adequate to cleave dence voting strength ra- lute or cancel the thorny legal precepts. Ini- myriad a tially, political (Whitcomb, at relatively easy elements cial or may have been 1858). plain- page 144, clearing 91 S.Ct. in Dallas find search to tiffs, therefore, must scale the bulwark However, remain- Bexar Counties. presumed constitutionality shrouded, ing districts are multimember clear for it is State’s scheme submerged enveloped in cultural beyond dispute multimember densities, demographic torrents chasms, unconstitutional, per se tricts are not pit- sociological theory political conjunction with sin- nor is use simplistic toward course once falls. The gle impermissible member districts ap- goal man, now one vote” of “one 1858). 142, page (Whitcomb, S.Ct. pears elusive as the source Nile. replete of this record is much So conjecture opinion that multimem- Hidalgo County, exception of With the the root of all ber districts are parties that all it is conceded where allegedly ills suffered satisfied, I standards constitutional poultice is effective and that Opinion of respectfully dissent reapportionment. This the Court. body as a Court does sit Opin- light Supreme Court’s In vary- weighing efficacy of scientists ing Register al., 412 U.S. et ion in White political representation. theories of af- L.Ed.2d 93 S.Ct. fact, practice specifically con- such a therein, my I firming in dissent effect Further, demned under Whitcomb. case mind the instant am that multi- Court has declared large degree merely the same asserts a objections initially may suspect or sub- member districts plain- raised challenge only ject very under limit- original my dissent tiffs and that of a successful at- ed criteria. Chances two appropriate it was now than more on further lessened tack such districts is years ago. these reasons For not where the district is small and does incorporate hereby brevity, I interest of comprise portion the to- a substantial my purposes this dissent for the (Whitcomb, legislative at tal seats. White, supra. Opinion filed pages 1858) 143, The 144, 91 S.Ct. acknowledged, therefore, Court of this believe the Because I significant strayed differences be- from there are far afield Court to so large Supreme extremely tween multimember dis- spirit and letter of ap- tricts, governing reapportion- such as Tarrant Court’s decision 1971, 675,000 Chavis, proximately nine residents with 403 ment Whitcomb legislative 363, 1858, small multi- L.Ed.2d seats and those 29 91 S.Ct. U.S. opposite at end of those it is out certain member districts essential to set guidelines juncture. spectrum.1 pertinent at this re seats for the Proximate maining issue are as follows: Counties at Representatives

Population (El Paso) 4 Dist. 72 297.000 (Travis) 4 Dist. 37 290.000 (Nueces) 3 Dist. 48 234.000 (Jefferson) 3 Dist. 7 221.000 (Galveston) 2 Dist. 19 150.000 (Hidalgo) 2 Dist. 59 150.000 (Lubbock) Dist. 75 149.000 (McLennan) Dist. 35 147.000 general addition, Supreme Having In ad- examined Court de- thus Supreme plaintiffs clared that Court con- must show intent monitions of cerning adopt reapportionment, it is essential a multimember guidelines specific district scheme which was conceived or consider the more operated purposeful majority of this Panel from which the devices to fur- Whitcomb, departed. ther racial or economic In discrimination or have further designed White, supra, supra, to dilute the crite- the vote of as well as minorities. (Whitcomb, supra, page to: at ria and burden of the 91 S.Ct. 1858) “ produce sup- . . evidence to . Furthermore, port findings political pro- Justice White concludes leading Whitcomb, supra, that there must be cesses to nomination and elec- remedy open partici- equally tion effective were not available which will pation problems group question alleviate the found in an un- —that opportunity constitutional multimember its members had less than district. pages did other Court Whitcomb notes on residents the district participate political processes page 91 S.Ct. 1878: legislators and to elect of their choice.” “Moreover, problems if of mul- (White, supra, page 766, 412 U.S. at ti-member districts are unbearable or page 2339.) 93 S.Ct. at even unconstitutional at all remedy clear that the is a mem- applying Whitcomb, standard, system ber district fully with its lines care- supra, specifies that Courts should take special note of districts where representation drawn to ensure mi- racial, economic, ethnic, to sizeable or nority register (1) is not or allowed religious groups and with its own ca- vote, (2) political party to choose the pacity overrepresenting and un- they support, (3) participate desire to derrepresenting parties and interests they party in the affairs of the permitting and even for support, (4) equally rep- desire to to be legislature the voters to control the legisla- resented on those when occasions government of a State.” tive party candidates are chosen they choose to support, (5) regu- ^[*] *X* *X- 'X* -X- ^[*] larly excluded from the slates of both powers equity “The remedial of an major parties, denying thus them the adequate task, court must be occupying legislative chance of seats. but are not unlimited.” equitable Not must there be an Supreme supra, White, Court remedy law, requirement set out the additional gone step Whitcomb, one further continuing the Court consider the must supra, requiring explore the Court to past effects of discrimination on mi- possible and fashion where a less bur- nority group’s ability participate plan ordering densome than an entire political process as a factor in the single reapportionment. member district aggregation indicating of circumstances Commenting on the District Courts’ fail- vote dilution. alternatives, ure to consider such Justice The constitutional barometer in these page 160, White stated in Whitcomb at victory cases is calibrated not actual page 91 S.Ct. 1878: polls, at the but is rather based on con judgment “The Court entered with- cepts equity mi and fairness where expressly putting sup- out aside on nority party candidates and members grounds portable alternative winning sig have at least a chance of or creating single-member districts nificantly influencing fights intraparty ghetto leaving the (Whit and issue-oriented elections. intact, possi- otherwise as well as the comb, 159, page 403 U.S. at 91 bility S.Ct. that the Fourteenth Amendment 1858) simple could be re- satisfied ghetto’s at-large to claim that or sufficient quirement some of the minority’s special not year interests were must reside each candidates delegation by the multimember ghetto.” heeded underrepresented were ab- or Supreme has essence, the Court to fur- voice sent their own ele- recognized must be some that there policy own views without ther .their State, by the substantiat- intent

ment of proof would have been outcome findings, polit- ed factual representatives if had been different vote dilution or ical disenfranchisement single from districts. chosen member remedy effective available and with an n 1858) (Whitcomb, page 155, 91 S.Ct. Judge may order Three Court before group Sixth, dis- the fact that one legislative dis- reapportionment of State represented in tinctive interests must be tricts. enough legislature it if is numerous repre- seat, to command at least one interesting especially examine It is living majority in an area suffi- sents may not be consid- which those factors single ciently compact to constitute and immaterial ered or are irrelevant district, grounds rejected member dis- of the multimember a consideration redistricting page in Whitcomb at First, fact that trict dilemma. 156, 91 S.Ct. 1858. ghetto who were residents number legislators proportion Turning majority opinion now to the ghetto prove population does not upon and the cases relied therein from evidence such crimination absent Appeals,2 the Fifth Circuit Court of po- participation in the residents lacked apparent becomes riously se Court has (Whitcomb, p. process. litical gov eroded the “Whitcomb test” 1858) Second, the fact that each S.Ct. erning reapportionment improp bloc-voting delegation has member of a erly considered or failed to consider cer legislators more gle than from sin- influence Supreme tain of the Court mandates set compelling is not a districts out herein. reason to redraw multimember districts finding representa- Panel ab absent a that such declares legislature initio “the for more in the Court has lib- tives counted representatives dichotomy from than did erated us of de fac- (Whitcomb, jure”. page (Majority Opinion, to and member districts. de page 643) My reading 1858) Third, mi- White and where S.Ct. ghetto contrary. equal norities residents have Whitcomb is to the It has process, the fact access been conceded that in White the Su- preme that their candidates are defeated at the added another dimension to finding against polls totality does not mandate a of circumstances which must (Whitcomb, multimember districts. be considered in these cases—that of page 1858) Fourth, incompatability it is S.Ct. cultural combined with deny continuing equal protection past not a denial legislative effects of discrimi- losing candidates, against seats to nation treatment minorities. However, even in imperative those so-called “safe” districts it is to note that year party history where the same wins after White also stressed the of offi- year providing Texas, there was effective ac- cial ing racial discrimination cit- political process. cess to the mere The instances where Texas law had insti- group majority pri- fact that one interest finds itself tuted or fostered vote legislative elections, “place” outvoted mary and without seats of the so-called rule invoking registration procedures which, its own is no basis for consti- voter and (Whitcomb, pages improper per se, tutional remedies. had neverthe- while 154, 155, 1858) Fifth, operated 91 S.Ct. it is not less enhance racial discrimi- McKeithen, (Fifth Cir., 1973); McKeithen, 8. Zimmer v. 485 F.2d Turner 1297 v. 490 F.2d (Fifth Cir., 1973). 191 This is intentional action nation. pure State these factors must have the effect simple fencing minority and and such amounts to out.” jure concept. of the de affirmance find at I odds with the relevant citing from the Justice White Graves reading My case law. Whitcomb and opinion the Mexi- Barnes declared that White, supra, indicates sine that de- in Bexar was can-American qua non can distilled be into the follow- in- nied access when cultural ing conjunctive trinary elements conjoined compatibility was with over-simplification: without too much poll tax and the most restrictive voter (1) sovereign Texas State of registration procedures in the nation to operated” “conceived or its nine multi- {White, supra, dilute the Chicano vote. “purposeful member districts as devices page 2332) 768, 412 Again, at U.S. 93 S.Ct. to further racial or economic discrimina- Supreme Court reiterates designed tion . . . dilute the coupled that there must be action minorities”; (2) vote of with other circumstances before disman- jure” plans accomplish purpose “de tling re- of multimember districts is and intent of the State of Texas quired. in fact did dilute and cancel out vot- language ing specific Whitcomb, rights prevent The ef- of minorities and supra, this dissent cor- process; cited further fective access necessity jure (3) single roborates for a de dis- districts as finding following tinguished passage: districts, from multimember pluralitarian or plans, other ei- would suggestion “But there is no here prob- ther tend solve or to solve these County’s that Marion district, multi-member lems since it is academic that law through- or similar districts thing will not undertake a useless State, oper- out the were conceived or impose plan which does not offer purposeful ated devices to further remedy. racial or economicdiscrimination. As plaintiffs concede, many ‘there no basis Just as other areas of law asserting especially Rights the Civil field designed tricts in Indiana to di- were where State action is involved virtue proce- ” (Em- policy, practice lute the vote of legislation, minorities.’ of dure, phasis added) {Whitcomb, Supreme legis- 403 U.S. has Court held page 149, page 1872) jure S.Ct. at lative or intent el- de is an essential proven prior ement to be Federal light unequivocal these clear and Court re- intervention. This White, statements in both Whitcomb and cently desegregation borne out in school finding majority of this Court litigation Keyes Independ- v. Denver they have been somehow “liberated” (1973), ent School District 413 U.S. dichotomy jure de from the facto-de 93 S.Ct. 37 L.Ed.2d fur- wholly without foundation. To find my upon Opinion ther relied in Mor- dispense unshackled freedom to F.Supp. al., ales et al. v. Shannon et specific mandates of the (1973, W.D.Tex.) appears be- It surely rely gossamer, diaph- even therefore, yond dispute, “de anous, interpretations un- which I am jure-de dichotomy facto” remains an im- perceive any able to under construction legal concept ap- portant clearly which is opinions. of these two plicable and reasonable to State action concept refers to their legislative reapportionment cases. qua reapportionment the sine non following language: analysis County-by-County evidence this dissent will discussed one qua “No element is a sine non history unquestionably any show finding access; of a of denial of nor past given those Counties discrimination must all Coun- ty ; however', by minority . impotent . . a combination has been rendered groups representation pro- activity political decade. to obtain least the last portion percentage evi- their dearth of to There is also an absolute Whitcomb, by indicating population” are condemned Texas election laws dence action, pages any procedures on and 91 S.Ct. or other State 403 U.S. or designed covertly, 1858, respectively, specific overtly absent find- or were either ings minority operate vote. of a denial of access. dilute to the or goes Opinion Majority on find to foregoing analysis the of Whit- While system” “place rule “serves also may perhaps comb and White be a need- the to to reduce election no function but repetition of the less guage or restatement lan- contests with a of head-to-head a series principles by enunciated the emphasis the ele- consequent racial Supreme opinion Court, I am of (Majority Opin- appears” ment where listing specific compris- factors all 643) no ion, page and that ing minority vote dilution well as all any explaining policy the use of rational may factors which not be considered Opin- (Majority districts. multimember rulings this Court under has been those 643) perusal ion, page My My purpose in this endeavor essential. record, depositions and evidence disclos- reading First, cursory is twofold. “place any, little, mention of the if es guidelines the numerous admoni- pro con, system” nor or either digested opinions lengthy in- tions concerning testimony the State’s elicited complexity dicates of the redistrict- adoption policy of multimember ing problem and the multi-faceted view- century. turn of the districts at point judge from which a Court must come to The burden is on the virtues of a To scheme. tangible proof of a dis- forward with light emanating state that the of truth system” ir- criminatory “place an or of White, “burning bush”, from the since policy. not a fit This is rational State subject Zimmer and Turner is now there for all judicial notice. see, comport does not limited to vision of this field so often admitted Summarizing “aggregate fac- parties’ ig- Courts, counsel and Court, considered tors” trepidation Supreme nores Majority paraphrasing of relies on entering politi- itself in ever Court Opin- precepts in the Fifth Circuit these my Secondly, cal thicket. I feel Broth- supra. Turner, Ob- ions in Zimmer ers on the of this Panel have side-by-side analysis viously, of Whit- oversimplified problem and either White, hand, and comb on the one solution, or else have failed to consider Turner, amply other, Zimmer on the important, I if not much of what deem whittling down Su- demonstrates imperative, man- Court guidelines preme hands of Court at the reaching decision and that date their Zimmer, there master craftsmen. responsibility it is the of the dissent intent, or no mention of State action respectfully differences illustrate these requirement via- that the Court consider opinion. prior ble alternatives succeeding portions of this dis- reapportionment and no mention that County-by-County focus on a sent will analysis remedy eq- there must be an effective testimony facts, and evi- dismantling uity prior requires law effort show that the ex- dence Having multimember districts. seem- isting infirm multimember scheme is not factors, ingly Majority deleted these redistrieting by the nor is it in need of up the adds several of own to take legislature pursu- or now judicial Unfortunately, the additions slack. order. ant specifically under Whitcomb as excluded pointed “Indifference out herein. TARRANT COUNTY 32: DISTRICT hostility representa- of the district-wide majority opinion, particularized minority inter- tives to As stated inability County comprises ests” “the District 32 Tarrant approximately pages 148, Chavis, supra, 91 S.Ct. with a figure, page the ethnic 675,368. this 1871: Of County breakdown indicates 82% “The identified an area of Court Black, Brown. White, city ghetto, predomi- 6% found it the nately as a thorough analysis has made a The Court Negroes by poor inhabited demographic economic, resi- with distinctive substantive-law inter- patterns in the various Census dential thought group unconsti- ests this ex- Tracts, that there and it is conceded tutionally underrepresented because ghetto heavy concen- area of Black ists legislators proportion with resi- County. also There are tration allegations ghetto dences in the elected from 1960 past in the record of discrim- ghetto’s pro- than the less inatory part on of mem- attitudes portion population, than less Anglo especially community bers of proportion legislators elected regards and educational residential populous ... less policies practices. ghetto trict, and less than the would likely county have elected had the con- by The similarities found the Court single-member sisted of districts. We compared Tarrant to those when major ap- find this deficiencies made District Court Marion proach.” striking Indiana are indeed. Tarrant, Like Throughout Supreme of Marion Whitcomb, the alleged and the Court found that inapplicable to the Court struck down as ghetto particu- residents area had the District central issue most of demographic lar findings characteristics render- above. Court’s enumerated ing cognizable them as a inter- They proportionate held that numbers group est voting delegations, distinctive legislators, interests. block {Whitcomb, supra, p. 129, ghetto’s unresponsiveness particu- 403 U.S. 1858) S.Ct. It was further improper concluded larized needs were political party that “the mechanism of reapportionment criteria findings absent organization party and the influence of districts nominating chairmen in candidates were problems would cure those and a defini- alleged additional Negroes factors showing frustrate tive not al- were power by the exercise of register vote, residents of the lowed choose ghetto {Whitcomb, supra, area.” p. political party, participate in its affairs p. 1862) Judge 91 S.Ct. The Three represented and to be considered or “Strong Whitcomb also found: choosing dif- process. the candidate It must housing ferences ... ghetto terms of also be.shown that residents were conditions, income and major educational lev- par- excluded from the slates of els, unemployment, juvenile rates ties. crime, and welfare assistance.” That findings Much of the under the made ghetto Court went on to find that majority opinion parallel those made “gross area inequity suffered from the District Court Whitcomb which representation, as determined resi- distinguished inappo- were or declared legislators” dence of and “characterized compelling site with more criteria. As general County’s Marion assembly dele- majority’s concerns the evaluation of the gation tending to coalesce and take political structure, apparent it is further positions legisla- common proposed varying susceptible that the facts are tion” repre- which obviated “. . . interpretations. find, instance, To substantial, though sentation of a minor- Black candidates are doomed ity, group”. {Whitcomb, supra, interest regardless failure of an vel endorsement p. 133, p. 1864) 91 S.Ct. non of the labor-liberal coalition is not a important It finding to note of non-access to the Court’s conclusory summation process Rather, by minority com- voters. findings ments on these attempt Whitcomb v. is to indicate vote dilution by advocating polls. popular more an issues. at the can White

failure What true, endorsing group If it than endorse? While these facts no doubt do ignore en- members should be remembered that Mr. Union choose 'Webber placed leadership, primary dorsement their can this second in the race against gar- political opponents. denial ac- three be characterized of White He approximately nered I The of cess minorities? think not. 46-47 % goes County majority point vote. In a of on to illustrate their Blacks and a 12% population, by stating campaign total of it con- that a leaflet only simple cerning bussing ra- needs mathematics to realize was a student issues only employed popular that Mr. Webber was not in races a cial tactic between candidate, bussing by very very Granted, but also who Whites. its one had Anglo imply race, support. imply substantial on To definition, focuses but to community totally unpopular topic solely it the White is was ignorant community that, of Mr. the White Webber’s race does or as an is- County Tarrant news media and elector- dem- sue between two candidates White political bigotry, ate a Mr. disservice. is Webber’s onstrates undertones racial amply simply career an active and illustrates without basis fact or reason ignores participation poll effective mi- and access results national showing County legislative bussing norities conclusively un- his popular easily race groups cannot within and should not be all of American society. counted. Furthermore, it is no indica-

tion minimization or cancellation of Gaskins, candidate, Charles a Black minority voting strength. unsuccessfully ran for office in 1972. gain He failed endorsement slating As concerns the can- Black appar- Precinct Workers Council which didates, evidentiary several facts must ently opted for nonendorsement his deposition be considered. plain- race supported or else his witness, well-known Joyce tiff’s Mr. Wendell Sif- popular opponent. White ford, indicates that the Tarrant Central political Labor Council Noteworthy is the also in Mr. Sifford’s tes- slating organized arm of timony labor which is fact that Black candi- upon aware of and relies com- Black dates have been chosen and run on munity support Republican to vote for and legislative ticket supported Labor might candidates. a Black County. seats in Tarrant It candidate but denied endorse- Republican stated that Party Johnson, leg- ment to Mr. R. C. a Black elected one office holder —State islative candidate in 1970. Senator, Betty Andujar Mrs. Tar- —in po- Labor Council combined with other Party’s rant recent histo- organizations party ry. litical to screen Among groups, nominees. those it Though political- no Blacks have been PASO, interesting to note Mexi- ly victorious, to conceive .difficult organization, Pre- can-American intraparty politics their denial Council, organiza- cinct Workers a Black party either in the selection of candi- tion, political where These included. dates or their or endorsement as official Webber, groups Bobby endorsed Mr. party precinct workers at the level and Black, among though his race was others concerning Testimony elsewhere. targeted likely not as one to win. Group” so-called “Seventh Street is con- opinion flicting Mr. describes at best. No witness was able to wealthy identify who group Webber as businessman money say spent time, except in an oriented, much and effort it was a business legislative organization; unsuccessful bid for a seat. conservative No apparently attempted any time, any place, Mr. one to es- knew of Webber or might allegedly cape group racial hurt where the bias which convened and appearing Representative him fact television de- Gibson Lewis “mythical”. it as Lewis stated It be noted scribed should approached by he’d such had it in never before Whitcomb a mul- them, group, nor solicited funds from timember over strength slate card. Lewis also testified the relative seen a twice size and political experience that in his there was now one before this Court in Tar- “kingmakers” group County (Marion County, Tarrant rant Indiana— legislators County, 15%; but rather that the are- of a total of legislators na free-for-all was a evidenced Tarrant Texas—9 Andujar 150, 6%). election of non-en- a Senator total or —a Republican. dorsed, ques- When female A multimember district which apathy, tioned about voter Lewis re- “large propor- and elects a substantial voters, regardless or marked that of race bi- tion of the in either seats house a political simply ideology, lacked interest legislature ”, cameral . . . Whit- Legislature ofttimes Chavis, supra, page 143, comb v. page 91 S.Ct. ignorance political show their own his susceptible is more to suc- by asking, “Why you in office aren’t challenge by cessful However, virtue its size. Washington?” opinion He was of the though the size the chal- single that not member districts would lenged may lighten plain- district change this attitude. somewhat, they tiffs’ burden must still prove “that un- multi-member districts goes of this Panel into constitutionally operate dilute to or can- prove some detail in an effort to voting strength polit- cel the of racial or delegation unresponsive County Tarrant Chavis, ical v. su- elements.” Whitcomb minority course, to sponsiveness interests. re- Of pra, page page 91 S.Ct. 1869. particular to interest groups preponderate is not a criteria under Whitcomb than Rather to favor long challenge political plaintiffs’ as there is effective ac- of burden in their group. Nevertheless, cess to District the evidence shows pointed minority should be out that most of has had effective access to County delegation political process. Tarrant voted for an Marion As with Coun- “open meeting” bill, bi-lingual education, Chavis, ty, (see Indiana v. Whitcomb posting prices prescription drugs supra) showing in Tar- there has been a (introduced by Leland, rep- County ghetto Mr. a Black rant aof well defined licensing resentative), requirements showing There area. has been a centers, child care and a crime and nar- numerous residents this area are program. (See leg- cotics enough educational Lewis to be entitled to least one at deposition, pages 192-199) Obviously, segregated if the into islator area were legislative appeal these district; enactments have a has there minority to proof interests as well as to Tar- been offered to show rant ghetto as a whole. There was number residents of Tarrant analyzing history leg- evidence the entire who have been elected to legislative session, cursory the last ghetto a proportion islature is to not in glance does not population. showing made, indicate the “indiffer- No has delega- ence” to ethnic however, minority interests has not been tion of which majority opinion. register are vote, vote, accused in the or to allowed partici- party, The racial connota- choose legislator tion in the pate showing statement that one in its affairs. No has against voted minority the creation of a State been made has been holiday honoring slate-making Dr. Martin Luther excluded from and other King pales by fact, the fact processes. (In that he favored candidate selection holiday memory Lyndon instead slate-making groups some of whose Johnson, Baines thought sought President of the United endorsements are States from important Texas. minority groups.) Plain- place primary carry elec- or third their burden second have failed tiffs victory, it, op- neither is tion is the multimember

show that any- race, evidence of to or such a close deny access effective erates to impotence and, participation thing full than less Chavis, supra: said in The has Whitcomb political process in District 32. finding can be substantiable winning signifi- “The chance of having that, access to full made is fights cantly influencing intraparty political process, has been elections issue-oriented polls. relatively unsuccessful (as herein seemed to some discussed not sufficient to of success is finding Such lack supra) inadequate protection mi- support discrimi- of invidious economic; norities, political, racial, or Chavis, supra, Whitcomb v. nation. See rather, voice, said, it is should pages 159-160, 91 S.Ct. be heard in the forum also public policy finally fash-

where however, view, experi- ioned. In our JEFFERSON COUNTY DISTRICT 7: insight ence and demon- not_yet District located within Jefferson strated multi-member districts County, a multimember district con- is approximately inherently invidious and violative taining 221,000 popula- of the Fourteenth Amendment.” electing legislative tion three a significant political delegation. most force Approximately 30% regards any slating as activi- district is Black. ty Price, is the Labor Mr. Council. relatively undisputed that While it is attempt 1970, gained acceptance his racially there moti- has been aura permissible as one of the three candi- vated Coun- discrimination Jefferson admittedly dates. Such endorsement ty, particularly regards, perhaps significant a achievement in Jefferson to, operation even limited of area la- County (testimony of Dr. Charles Co- unions, plaintiffs bor have not car- trell, Transcript, page 645). Trial How- showing by pre- ried their burden ever, such endorsement is not an abso- ponderance of the evidence that such guarantee victory, lute nor is failure opera- discrimination has motivated the gain precursor it the of frustration tion of the small multimember district Doyle and defeat. Messrs. and Powers way deny in such a as to the Black mi- were victorious without it. nority political effective access process. herein, As has been conceded there has been an aura of racial discrimina- have Blacks been elected on a dis- past, tion Jefferson City positions trict-wide basis Council regards particularly operation (the in both Beaumont and Port Arthur deposition local labor unions. At the major population two centers of the Nisby Beaumont, Cleveland it was County). Blacks have also been elected stipulated by plaintiffs’ counsel, Mr. Richards, that none of these conditions to the Port Arthur and South Park School Boards. changed by single would have been mem- example by The one used Dr. Cotrell County. ber districts in Jefferson In politi- show the relative isolation and single words, other member districts will cal ineffectiveness of the Black commu- not correct these conditions. nity is the race undertaken Black, significant A1 Price. A addition, In it must be recalled point Cotrell, however, overlooked Dr. District 7 is a small three member disparity is that between the first Supreme trict. if Even Court man- ranged approxi- three candidates fashioning date to be “color blind” in 9,600 mately place single for the first candi- member district were to be over- approximately 7,200 date drawn, looked and a “safe” district were place candidate, third Mr. Price. While it is inconceivable that the Black minori- ty perhaps present. better served at Such action is would be indeed curi- Leg- however, equally man is, in the 150 ous. note, It one lone voice curious to majority points out, as the islature. that'the present at-large system incorporates use increasing activity geographic place is, system; of a community combined with places candidates for various must re- contrary lack of to the confirm evidence geographically side defined wards. finding failed system seriously Such if deficient challenging carry burden in deny the desired result was to minorities existing multimember district. Plain- process. effective access to the have, effect, admitted that a tiffs geographic place system This is one of change plan to a member district the alternative remedies recommended might very nothing. achieve well Court in Whitcomb v. DISTRICT 35: McLENNAN COUNTY Chavis, supra, page 160, 91 S.Ct. Indeed, 35, encompassing in 1970 a Black elect- all of Mc- City ed to the ap- Lennan Council has a and another cur- rently 147,500 proximately serves on it. and elects a two delegation Leg- man multimember spite evidence, majority of such population, islature. theOf total position takes the institution of (approximately 25,600) are Black and system, produced which has two (approximately 10,300) are Mexi- 7% can-American. City Black Councilmen in the last two

elections, is “curious” on the one hand ample and single minority points desirability out, As the evidence of the there is geographically a member districts on the defined Black other. communi- ty Waco, major city in the in the Coun- majority, The faced with such a fac- ty, representing approximately of setting, attempts negate tual 20% to and city’s population. by commenting weaken it that “Black councilmen, however, apparently racially It is conceded that have a biased spokesmen attitude not acted as has in effective existed McLennan Coun- minority ty past. black and in the The ma- interests.” Whether that attitude jority signifi- operation has further seeks to dilute motivated the the of the exist- ing legislative by cance of these election results multimember observ- in ing way deny such a ty that one of the Black to Councilmen as the racial minori- against in political was elected a race another proc- effective to access the Black, losing by not, however, approximately three to ess is conceded. It is on winning polling point places pivotal disagree one Black that I Thus, majority. he the White areas. concluded burden Plaintiff’s is to a history by was elected them racially Whites owed show more than a therefore, political was, debt biased attitudes District 35. representative effective for his fellow by majority One instance cited the minority group is, The fact members. opinion which could be characterized as however, candi- that race Black deny minority motivated to the Black date received a vote from the substantial equal political process access the represented race White electorate. This proc- City related to the Council election voting pat- not tern, racial Black/White City In ess. Council elec- Waco probably more the liberal/ held tions were the first time on a competition referred conservative ward, member district basis. Moore, Jr., witness, the infra. Tom City In a Black ran for the Coun- witness, testimony plaintiffs’ only The cil from one and fell wards slightly victory. newly Gilbert, active Robert L. a Black short of The politics, County Council, acting indicates that resolution, McLennan elected healthy atmosphere differ- changed voting system there is back ing political commu- at-large in the Black views old remains in one which effect (There slating nity. is no candidates. See testified Mr. Gilbert Opinion.) Majority is- Nor have minorities cases NAACP recent school neighborhood participating favoring been excluded from a statement sued workings pointed or- inner of the Democratic Par- out that that He schools.3 ty (the ganization only party Federation effective Black neighborhood County split school McLennan as in over so much of the were concept State). fact, along political participate fully as lines Blacks as well Party many generally. holding (Deposition Gil- of Robert L. Democratic precinct positions. (Deposition bert) Jr.) Moore, of Tom It is conceded Again, plaintiffs attempted have no evidence there is proof carry their burden of reference delegation un- been from District past attitudes of in the racial bias particularized needs responsive challenged district. Plaintiffs have showing if Even such minorities. utterly failed to meet the tests of Whit- herein, or dispositive of the issues were supra. comb Chavis, moment, great even point. Plaintiffs on this have failed 37: TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT minori- presented no evidence have County encompasses de- in McLennan The district the entire ties political County, having to the approxi- access effective nied mately electing 300,000 process. a four-mem- delegation Legislature. ber minority Moore, Further, opinion Tomof district, population of the lo- Jr., who served witness a defense primarily in cated what is called East Legislature until 1972 District 35 Austin, comprises approximately liberal, the 32% as a himself classifies population (20% the total American, Mexican- strength effectiveness Black). McLennan Black swing vote in position in its rests witnesses who could be cate- opinion, gorized political experts In Mr. Moore’s close elections. Wright, is much more division in trict were Mr. Frank L. who along organize tra- helped appropriately as one described and has served as Chair- Democrats, lines than man of the ditional West Austin liberal/conservative Further, along Representative Weddington. in lines. Sarah Black/White opinion, a division Mr. Moore’s Wright acknowledged being Mr. char- present man multimember two (Trial Transcript, acterized a liberal as single result could districts member into 709). page said, was, prime He a or- polarization of this liberal/conser- ganizer Democrats, of the West Austin a degree split a to such vative geographical political group, action delegation present unified no would organize helped and has worked its much of lose front and would geographical po- with several other such present effectiveness. (Trial groups Transcript, litical action page 708). voting stipulate Tomof record addition, In he has done Legisla- Moore, Jr. while he was considerable work with Black various (Moore deposition, ture was excellent. groups, and Mexiean-American his own 16) page theory being the time honored one that that, most effective force well at- amid an The clear evidence is organized grass activity. In his mosphere part roots of racial on bias view, Mexican-Americans Blacks and the minorities have some growing currently register a in- right weakened to not been denied the to resulting from in- vote, vote, ternal bifurcation run office. neighborhood previously ing re- v. the school indications of 3. This fact coalesces with the poll question ferred to in this dissent. bus- nationwide data on the testimony appraisal close of her creasing pressures leader- reveals for shifts continuing di- that rather than out of ship fear alienat- Such and direction. ing part constituency significant on some other of her effect a vision has had giving particu- close attention candidates from to of numerous the lack larized needs her “One is constituen- communities. these community itself, cy, her . and I’m difficulties . arise from the same . problem legislators— general both, plaguing really speaking all other about up Legisla- voluminous workload of divided and have remained so (Trial Transcript; pages they 503-505). ture pieces did to think not tend addition, Weddington exerting candidacy.” In Ms. testified themselves toward Wright 712) (Trial Transcript, page that the other Mr. members of the District delegation longer impos- 37 feel a definite commitment feels that it further minority community needs of the sible for a Black or Mexican-American (Trial Transcript, page 510). at-large win in the multimember 717). (Trial Transcript, page district Indeed, question When met with the direct Black, has Handcox, Mr. Berl whether the minorities in District 37 currently won election twice and is serv- have, use the multimember district ing City on the Austin Council and system, equal been denied access to the Board. Black woman School serves political process, Weddington Ms. re- addition, currently In there is Mexi- sponded in the rea- affirmative. Her serving can-American as one of the four sons, however, given that, were well years, Commissioners. In recent districts, drawn ran Mr. Garcia for the Board School electing would better chance of against and a Mr. Ruiz made the run-off previously Again, one of their own. another liberal candidate one of the stated, ability win the cri- Legislature races. Mr. Gonzalo determining teria effective access to the against running Barrientos, a fourteen political process. Wedding- Ms. While year incumbent, 1,000 came within votes may persuasive ton’s reasons conclu- winning 80,000 out votes cast. sions, they controlling light are not Furthermore, the evidence fails to estab- opinion Court’s in Whit- significant lish the existence of slate- Chavis, supra. comb v. making Indeed, groups in this district. overwhelming weight of the cred- many of those that do are in the exist preponderates ible evidence in favor of minority community. addition defendants No evidence efforts, these the minorities have been presented has been mi- show directly gaining successful access norities in District 37 are denied effec- workings Party, of the Democratic political process. tive access to consistently potent political the most They register vote, vote, influence district, securing force several legislators, political office, their run for party offices. Indeed, and win. for this to Court All of the above demonstrates the blindfold itself to the clear mandates degree great increasing political of guidelines ac- and tivism and awareness and the effective- require single restructuring and a into po- ness of the to minorities’ access the might member districts well frustrate process litical in District significant 37. and defeat the im- pact currently displayed minority by the Representative Weddington, Sarah communities. general- who won election in is 1972 and ly liberal, characterized a testified that DISTRICT 75: LUBBOCK COUNTY actively campaigned sought she in and support minority challenge communities The on next our tour finds expressed District 37. She concern in us District which includes Lub- give County approximate that she cannot the attention mi- to bock population and has an nority 147,000 needs she feels she should. A served a two- by

676 delegation. ally total held member of rural com- The a

man multimember ap- minority population munity. is of the district

proximately 36,000 or less than half is It is also uncontested that there legislative dis- ideal slating process choosing in the of candi- 75,000population. trict public dates for office Lubbock Coun- Legislative ty. primary The race at the opinion al- dwells While level was described the immediate past exclusively on evidence of most past Party, of the Democratic Chairman public in the discrimination recent (1969-1973), as Madison Sowder a public system facilities and other school (Sowder Deposition). “free-for-all” on the socio-economic condition minority in Lub- the Mexican-American The evidence shows further is County, little, any, delegates if evidence voting bock from District records of record, re- finding delegates is none support shown 75 a that these majority, indi- present- which generally ferred to for have voted issues minority in District along cates them lines Mexi- ed to the same prevented effective access legislators. has been In can-American and Black political process. have Plaintiffs short, the evidence District shows sought carry their chal- legislators sensitive, the burden of been rather have lenge by showing past discrimina- a particularized politi- callous, than po- than areas other access minority tion of their constituents. cal needs process. litical It is and uncontested this admitted minority have That few members dissent incidences that there been sought or been elected to office racial in Lubbock discrimination is the is- district not determinative of County past on the social supra, Chavis, v. sue. See Whitcomb public plane, but no evidence facilities pages 148, 91 S.Ct. As support been has finding adduced which would said, winning equivalent not is existing multimember Chavis, access. Whitcomb deny minority operated supra. is, however, mi- fact political process. effective access nority run members have for office again, Once evidence Irving, have on occasion won. Ms. Joan point record is the uncorroborat- Black, currently serves on the Lubbock opinion plaintiffs’ witness, ed trell, Dr. Co- 1972, plain- In School Board. feels, to the effect that after a he witness, Froy Salinas, Mexican- tiffs’ days tour of two and the whirlwind American, Board, ran the School analysis statistics, voting of some race, in a four man came within doing just as well votes of the In Ms. Pauli- winner. testimony, it should. Such ab- Jacovo, Mexican-American, na ran evidence, sence falls far corroborative Commissioner and Much lost. carrying plaintiffs’ short support burden to by plaintiffs made of her defeat. challenge their view, primarily the her loss was district. multimember feeling pre- her result of racist within analysis A the election cinct. reveals, however, closer EL DISTRICT 72: PASO COUNTY appropri- that a more description defeat would have this Court ate of Ms. Jacovo’s parallel than draw between El Paso would be urban versus rural rather demographic Anglo. Bexar In- Counties as versus concerns Mexican-American deed, patterns yielding and cultural similar some outside Mexican-Americans actively analogy political Employing results. Jacovo’s urban residence Ms. cornerstone, plaintiffs against (Sowder deposi- campaigned their her maintain major 21). Paso, Bexar, composed tion, pages 20, that El like Ms. Jacovo’s seems, of 56.- it was Mexican-American obstacle, was that she running attempted to urbanite for an office tradition- Plaintiffs show 87%. heavy testify concentration of Chícanos to Mexican-American of El from El what known as South Side Paso was David Morales deprived political Morales, Paso who have been behalf of the who State. language barrier, political campaigns access virtue of the has been active in discriminatory economics, past practices years, for several testified that “We running political repression (Chícanos) in the form of have been active taking Poll Tax. Plaintiffs’ now defunct we’ve been successful spent expert, Cotrell, (TR. 419) p. all of some Dr. Charles of the offices.” He days though two and an extensive taxi tour of further concluded that there had City reaching profound, past before these been some acts of racial discrimina- unsupported tion, wholly community Dr. conclusions. the Mexican-American voting pat- Cotrell further testified that able to overcome to the ex- County prohibited terns were similar to Bexar tent that taking are not from average in El political op- voter turn-out an active role. As posed plaintiffs’ witnesses, Paso was Mexican-American Morales 30% Anglo prove an effort stated he favored the multimem- Anglo “numerically popula- plan single smaller ber district fearful through legal tion still po- controls de- member districts would serve to both (TR. vice of the multimember district”. larize and disenfranchise the Chicano p. 605) presented destroy also virtually political vote and strength. the elected of the Democratic voting Chairmen effectiveness or Where Republican very Parties substantiate it possible is now conceivable and findings. Dr. community CotrelPs ultimate Both for the Mexican-American campaign carry every office, witnesses testified that ex- county-wide elective penditures single for a seat State member districts would almost thi¡ $15,000-$20,000 pres- certainly amount to political opportuni- dilute Although ent ty. multimember district. no witness testified that candi- testifying Also for of Texas the State dates had been unable to raise such was Sen. Frank who served Owen had amounts, political opined Chairman Representative a State from El Paso that campaign member districts would lower from 1950-1954 and later as Sena- encourage costs and more tor until 1965. The former Senator They Mexican-American candidates.4 stated that he could never have been although further testified that was there elected to nor office remained campaigning no overt racial conducted sup- there without substantial Chicano Paso, any slating in El nor was there in port. demographic make-up Given the was, however, races, State House there Owen stated that would “whisper campaign” nebulous sort of impossible any candidate, past, Anglo community conducted and present future, successfully run groups helped some business fi- portion goodly without a of the Mexi- nance and endorse An candidates. Morales, can-American vote. Like Mr. objective appraisal of this evidence present plan Senator Owen favors hardly presents image the mental again fearing Paso, polari- in El effect smoke filled room of bossism of zation of the races and the creation of which the DCRG Dallas ac- politics. Ward heeler While there are type cused or of political/racial the invidious slating groups races statewide discrimination found powerful political Paso, nor cliques in El Parish, Fifth Circuit in Ouachita many the witness testified there were (See Turner, supra) Louisiana. attorneys profes- Mexican-American (El Paso) In District vary given the four success- costs so much even within a mul- spent ranging ful Candidates amounts timember district as to be an unreliable ba- $17,000 $3,000, indicating Campaign constitutionality. rometer of expert testimony by the witness politically active and who were sionals disadvantaged regards community. others as leadership provided in that hardly fact is interesting of El Paso com- South Side perhaps most It is pelling originally type of evidence his filled presented Mr. lost note that Owen County this Court on Bexar to a seat for a Senate recent bid State Rights replete Civil which was named Santiestaban Mexican-American reports specific Anglo income on studies and candidates who over three won living conditions, tabulations, education- and one Chicano. provide infinitum to al achievements ad ease, Throughout application complete picture area. of the Barrio test determine the Whitcomb say Simply a concentra- that there is a difficult constitutional issues has been City area of the one tion of Chícanos (or “access lack To find task indeed. with the unsubstantiated combined process” thereof) political where to the subjective they are dis- statements victory political no actual there has been advantaged the sort should be divining polls at the is much akin to proof to draw compelling for this Court angels many on the head how can stand parallel Barrio. Antonio to the San the Arguendo, County, however, pin. In El Paso generaliza- these even if all proof intricate nor the the task is not so true, sta- are taken as the absolute tions question, so elusive. Without access tistics indicate participation at all levels minorities governing process as shown below government effec- is both active and following paragraph. tive. first Mex- El Paso elected its attempted analogy As concerns the be- Raymond Telles. Mayor, iean-American tween El Paso and Bexar Counties years ago, three Mexi- Four there were plaintiffs, it should first be noted El Paso to elected from can-Americans significant apparent there is an Legislature: present, At Sena- State population disparity. County Bexar represents El Paso tor Santiestaban approximately 830,000, El whereas the hotly contested after a Texas Senate only Paso multimember district contains Anglos one three election between 290,000. Supreme about candidate. other Mexican-American Whitcomb, supra, specifically stated Anglo Parenthetically, candidates may subject multimember districts be Anglo community. carry did not even challenge where circumstances show currently County Two Commissioners minimizing voting cancelling or out of and have office are Mexican-American strength and that such are es- districts posts There since 1962. so held justiciable pecially “. . . when the pres- two Mexican-Americans also large district is and elects a substantial ently City Council who El Paso portion of the in either of a’ seats house City-wide ifAs won office in elections. legislature (Em- bicameral . . .” enough, proof it should this were not phasis added) Surely, it can be conceded noted that El Paso Mexican-Americans County (pop. that El Paso alone following occupy offices elective now 347,000) sufficient does not even have designated Two Dis- numbers: seat, population to warrant a Senate Judges, three Justices trict Court must share a rounding with several sur- Senator Constables, Peace, Domestic one Three Furthermore, counties. County Judge, one Relations Court does not district at issue multimember Judge Corpora- one Court at Law encompass entire Judge. tion Court large enough Rep- require four how It inconceivable Obviously, not the resentatives. this is ignore successfully legisla- Court can of this populous of district nor kind undisputed hard, circumnavigate cold, delegation contemplated tively powerful overwhelming in so evidence suspect statistical under Court as the conclu to arrive El Paso Whitcomb, supra. single requiring inevitably member it must sion districts. concluded that an may group representing ethnic population racial discrimination Whatever prevalent past, been is and exhibited the abili- ty Paso, great weight catalyst alone would be the of El statistics persists only as an inaudible Texas. show parties

whisper of a few at the cocktail hearsay Other than the broadest bigots politically no which is frustrated generalities subjective opinion heard probative to establish evidence of force single this Court in favor member is uncon district multimember Paso, simply districts in El there is no simply compel There no stitutional. is factual evidence of constitutional vio- ling in El or other past evidence Paso solid minority voting lation or dilution of the has a “continu discrimination strength which would necessitate Feder- ing minority on the effect ... reapportion- al Court intervention group’s ability po participate in the respectful, ment and firm, I stand in McKeithen, process”. litical v. Turner opposition majority opinion to the (Fifth Cir., No. F.2d 191 71- on the matter of El Paso 2221) County. plaintiffs’ Furthermore, ex- even

pert, Cotrell, Dr. that El Paso testified DISTRICT 48: NUECES COUNTY “slate-making” pursue type not did stop expedition The next our is politics on the level as in Dallas encompassing major por- District 48 and Bexar Counties. There was no evi- County. tion of Nueces This multimem- existing political- whatever of dence approximate popula- ber district has an group ly domineering endorsement 220,000 electing leg- tion of a three man discourage or which strives to eliminate delegation. currently islative It prevent them candidates or by Representatives served DeWitt Hale participating candidate (Anglo), (Mexican-Ameri- Carlos Truan process. selection can) (Lebanese and Joe mem- Salem —a absolutely no evidence in There also group demographic ber the “other” tending the record show that terminology). Paso are unre- elected officials of El Dr. Cotrell’s tour taxi of Texas al- sponsive particular to the concerns days lowed him three the fair coastal minority group. opposite Indeed the city Corpus and Nueces Christi Coun- appears to be the case. What with ty. plethora of Chicano officials at elected thing' One should be clarified at the every governmental level, a claim of “to- witness, outset. Plaintiffs’ Dr. Chas. grossest kenism” naiveté. evinces the Cotrell, witness, Representa- and their opinions I must concur with the ex- tive Carlos Truan Nueces pressed witnesses, by the Morales and others, philosophically op- well as are Owen, redistricting of that a El Paso posed to multimember districts as a County may only serve frustrate what representation. method of As has been politically viable —the Register al., supra, said White et Certainly Mexican-Ameriean vote. however, districts, multimember even single concept is a two conjunction when used in and combina- edged sever, sword and one could which tion with member districts in a segregate polarize a numerical ma- legislative apportionment plan jority provide into a district would per unconstitutional se. representation possible in less than now county-wide expert, Cotrell, Dr. Plaintiffs’ makes election. Where there is contradictory the clear and assertion no evidence of racial discrimi- lingering past that on the hand the fact that nation effects of one Legislature plus proof Black has discrimination elected abundant political process, from Galveston is of little or no effective access to the 1966); minorities, because significance Gal- the Blacks because - rep- of historical adequately the effects an County cumulative been have veston discrimination, pattern ineffec- legislators feel have of who the resented are, therefore, hand, and and elected; Dr. Co- tive frustrated other been political access to the denied effective few Mexi- the fact that trell asserts that process. outlining opinion his on this a In have been elected can-Americans expert plaintiffs’ witness, point, Dr. Co- be County is should and as Nueces such trell, tending in the reasoned that had minorities important an consideration existing past in efforts to been successful support his that conclusion seriously oper- influence the election elect does has and multimember district public had, for deny minority holders and ac- office effective ate to this reason, in some unsuccessful political process. conclu- been This cess years, ten such situation would and last obviously signal then made in the face of the clear sion undisputed eight rise in effects last fact that opinion, legislative del- discrimination. In Dr. Cotrell’s years one-third ten been, clearly such evidence show County would egation from Nueces change single dis- need member now, composed of Mexican- it is serving tricts. Representative American who is (Plaintiffs’ third his witness, consecutive term. County in situation Nueces Truan; Representative Carlos converse, quite the however. The undis- Lebanese) Anglo; and puted clearly Salem-— Hale — evidence outlines political potency marked success testimony plaintiffs’ witnesses County in Mexican-American Nueces witness, Representa- defendants’ years. previously in the last As not- ten Hale, in ex- tive DeWitt is unanimous ed, legisla- one-third of the multimember pressing while the observation that delegation tive has been Mexican-Ameri- may there discrimina- have some eight years. can for ten last County past tion in Nueces Further, at the three of a time may polarization ex- current racial City Council, six at elected large part'due ist is in Fifth Cir- large major city, Christi, Corpus Corpus cuit’s decision Cisneros Mexican-American; are Black one is a Independent District, 324 Christi F.Supp. School Anglo Anglo May- and two are with an (S.D., Tex.1970), affirmed at-large pro- or. Other elections remanded, part, part modified in following duced the current situation: Cir., 1972). (5th Plain- 467 F.2d 142 Clerk, Solis, an Oscar defeated witness, Cotrell, expert person- tiffs’ Dr. Anglo (Transcript, page incumbent feeling antagonistic ally to- considers Judges 730); County at Law racially busing to wards forced Margarito (who an An- Garza defeated generally evincing identifiable attitude discriminatory feeling glo post; Transcript, page for the Anglo com- —testimony Representative Carlos minority munity groups. toward This Truan), (the Pena two Hector blanket overlooks extensive indictment positions County County); such indicating polls recent nationwide (one of four Commissioner Solmon Ortiz achieving busing forced as a means of County); member districts gen- racially system school balanced Flores, Justices of the Peace Armando erally segments unpopular our with all Lopes; Manuel and one Cantu and Jose society it. to like or want one seems —no (testimony Mexican-American Constable (See page 731) Transcript also Truan, Representative of State Carlos opinions plain- Much is made of 544). Transcript, page resid- tiffs’ there remain witnesses that spite overwhelming facts, discrimination; In of these past ual effects from opinion expresses Dr. yet Cotrell minority unused voters ten hangover recent of the last being such conditions able of a to vote because Rather, naught. years should count for (abolished poll from the in Texas tax preced- members of this multimember district discrimination” “historical the ing part political po- the northern and western lost period of obvious County Kleberg controlling and all of Nueces Coun- living tency consider- should be ty. Representative Truan, reaching while conclusion ation his representing in Nueces Nueces Mexican-American Kleberg grew up under- access is denied effective standably process. it almost unani- had carried Anglo mously (Mexican-American, to the clear evidence addition voters) previous Black elections. currently effectiveness (Transcript, page Further, 735) Dr. Co- played by minority population of following day opinion, three trell’s his evidence is also clear Nueces the tour, signs early the clear particularized of needs these the polarity in Nueces heartbreak of exists adequately groups only have been not Rep- County diametrically by opposed Legisla- admirably advanced occupation over resentative Hale whose Repre- twenty years by ture for some running twenty years the last been indicated, and, sentative he has Hale Nueces for office in recently joined more in his efforts 729-730) (Transcript, pages by years Representatives in the last ten (1968 slate-making (1964) tactics, Truan as a Bonilla The issue (See testimony Represent- date). discriminatory (as in the method of control (the Hale, 725, seq., Transcript, pages case) by ative et the the Dallas Anglo part Representative Truan, Transcript, community) clearly not a only County. page 519, seq.) Indeed, Representa- The et of the case in Nueces slate-making attempt paragon the at tive Hale has been such a evidence of any advancing leg- pioneering progressive testimony of Dr. in level is the Cotrell City particularized needs there were two slates islation vital to the longtime Corpus 1971 the of his Mexican-American con- Council Christi composition stituency League the current of United election. Given the (as previously noted) (LULAC) made the Council Latin American Citizens honorary role of slate- can assumed that the him an efforts. his making minor, Today, Representative if not non-exist- has been Hale carries ent, regards any attempt larger by at discrimi- Mexican-American areas mar- community. by Anglo gins natory Anglo control than areas. witness, opinion In the of defendants’ opinion Representa- Dr. Cotrell’s (deposition), Nueces Peeler Travis Truan, having by tive won a lesser mar- Executive Committee Democratic gin victory in 1972 than in 1970 slating Chairman, Nueces there is suffering slings no doubt from the Legisla- regards County. As outrageous polari- and arrows of racial opinion level, joined in this he is tive plaintiffs’ discrimination, proba- zation and lacks expert, Dr. Cotrell: weight. (Transcript, pages tive et think could “. . I don’t we . seq.) taking This Court feels secure a so- El Paso as describe Nueces and judicial knowledge heavy influ- legislative slate-making state called ence of the Roman Catholic Church 645) (Transcript, page level.” Corpus important An Christi area. thing conclusion, unsup- factor left out of Dr. Cotrell’s ported showing by prepon- Representative succeeded conclusions is that if racial “falling is that of the evidence derance Truan out had rather serious polar- polarization if such does exist Bishop Corpus Christi” any degree ac- effective fact, denies was, ization to publicly 1972. He criti- political process Mexi- Bishop.5 severely by cess to the cized rather Black) (and Further, can-American (Transcript, page 736) due contrary being (such legislative contention redistricting all Bishop jumping down there Traun phraseology all over Mr. was: “The 5. The exact point presented overwhelming weight preponderance on this The evidence the un- evidence), po- It is indeed concise. consists racial factual such Representative opinion larization, being product corroborated rather than (Trial Tran- long Ed script, page of District 19 history Harris current condition 240). opinion, discrimination, In his the immedi- of racial influence the intent the Board was to ate, result of Fifth recent and direct races Dis- outcome of the Cisneros Circuit’s school decision encompassing major portion trict (See depositions opinion, supra. County. plan adopted Peeler, of Galveston by transcript testimony of Travis excising Board, Tract while Apolonco Montemayor, Representative 5,500 (total approximately Blacks 1219’s Representative Carlos Truan and DeWitt 8,575 population in Tract 1219 is Hale.) Census), the re- leaves untouched maining 28,000 population of Black Gal- AND 19: DISTRICTS 17 GALVES- cursory Further, County. veston TON COUNTY map-for glance Tract Census challenge County is to Galveston the monu- 17 and 19 reveals Districts limited to recent an attack redis- in their the Board mental task faced tricting which took Census Tract 1219 man, one to the “one efforts to conform placed Dis- District 19 and into of the Constitution. vote” mandates allege change trict 17. Plaintiffs the peninsula mainland, The includes area heavy made Tract because of 1219’s meander- and island land masses ing concentration of Blacks in an affirma- of nature. fashion tive effort voting strength their to dilute and minimize Representative opinion in violation of the Four- The bare light geograph- teenth Amendment. Lightfoot, the extreme See Gomillion v. Harris in 5 faced of nature 364 U.S. S.Ct. ical obstacles efficacy (1960). L.Ed.2d It conceded efforts is Board its belies plaintiffs’ counsel, Richards, judgment. more Much Mr. and of a rush to plaintiffs’ support Cotrell, by plaintiffs to expert, Dr. Charles must shown efforts, challenge good faith that there no evidence multimem- to is that Redistricting Legislative oper- Board. ber districts as used in Galveston of the presented deny ate does to to minorities effective access The dearth evidence (Trial presumption political process. Transcript, not overcome pp. 666) constitutionality action 626 and this Court is of the Board’s What change. concerned with in compel Galveston then racially gerry- claim motivated mandering. CONCLUSION paramount inquiry regard The in this beginning, have rec- we “From Legislative is the motivation Re- pri- ognized- ‘reapportionment is districting taking Board in Tract 1219 marily consid- a matter for placing from District 19 and it into Dis- determination, eration trict 17. appropriate judicial relief becomes majority opinion points out, As the reap- legislature only to fails when pre- the 1970 census revealed that according constitu- portion federal to vious two-member multimember district timely fashion requisites in a tional approximately 20,000 popula- contained opportu- adequate having had an after tion in excess of the ideal two-member cases) (citing have We nity do so.’ fact, district. Faced with this legisla- that state to the view adhered Board had no alternative correct jurisdiction’ ‘primary over tors through redistricting. the imbalance legislative reapportionment.” White plan adopted placed The Tract Census 783, at (1973), 412 U.S. v. Weiser into It this 17. action page 794, 795, pages 93 S.Ct. plaintiffs which ra- claim have been cially 2354, 37 L.Ed.2d motivated. guaranteed language sured or is a virtual summation can or This Supreme any Further, in will elect officials. attitude of the Court such reapportionment suits evidence is of no value to all of the establish most body. contention of ever to come before that esteemed division warning directive at these nine It as a multimember districts into stands single jungle political ad- member the monishing districts would be the threshold wary panacea complaints for all lower Courts to be alleged attempting improve intrusion even tend to surefooted before would sovereign politi- discrimination. suming as- into the state forest This is true even activity. cal of Texas had an design improper minimize, motive Having thoroughly examined the evi- rights cancel out and dilute the of these presented it is dence each minority groups affairs judicial inter- inconceivable that Federal utterly which the evidence in case this required vention in those Counties at support. fails absolutely preponder- There is issue. ating evidence in this record to establish supra, White, Court in any in- nine Counties acknowledged that had “its volved that special vantage point” own and had Repub- Blacks, would afford Browns and “intensely appraisal” made an local greater parties case, licans, the to this situation in Bexar and Dal- political process than the access plaudits las Counties. Those same can- present multimember districts. be cast the case at Plain- Bar. evidence in this case of argument proof pri- tiffs’ was based probative real force is that certain marily subjective appraisal on a and a Blacks, (1) multimember districts cursory study in- most of the Counties Republicans not been Browns have and apparent with the motive of hav- volved districts; (2) or in some of the elected ing legisla- Court, this than the rather groups have not been members of these ture, gerrymander specifi- in reverse pro- in in direct elected other districts cally accept- promote politically and elect portion population. These are to their representatives. able The ultimate con- improper under Whit- considerations by clusions reached the members of undisputed evi- overlook the comb and my mind, ig- Panel, to of this in counties dence that certain cities and guidelines misinterpret nore or groups of multimember districts these spelled out in the several treatises hand- past do elect at and still by pre- Supreme ed down Court large Certainly there is officeholders. reapportionment litigation, vious of these that there evidence much evidence in discard of the factual or cancellation has been a diminution “expert opinion” favor their val- rights groups participate of these iant to crush the cause and ef- efforts political process. allegedly fect of infirm an and discrimi- 156, pages Whitcomb, natory political process. at As 403 U.S. It cannot be page legislative has warned reapportion- at 1876 91 S.Ct. denied that us, remedy provided judicial rights type if were ment of civil case is an emo- this, charged tionally competing it would failure such suit which any political reject political philosophies difficult to claims of and methods often organization charges electrify interest or identifiable clash unrestrained and litiga- spawn groups endless and “would or other racial ethnic discrimination. concerning dis- the multi-member tion This is an area into which the Federal employed systems widely in Judiciary indeed, proceed now trict with ex- must, may country.” For, this treme caution. preponderate clearly while emotion plain- in favor of a very Supreme case in this The Court challenge, importance tiff’s of a that, ab- fac- v. held and Whitcomb Chavis challenge showing support discrimination, tual “purposeful” racial sent right minority groups by preponderance of the evidence can- have no to be as- 684 sidestepped propriate. Reynolds Sims, over- not be 377 U.S. and must not 533, 586, S.Ct. L.Ed.2d looked. (1964). Weiser, See also White v. su- imposing drawn remedy of Court The pages pra, 794-795, 412 U.S. at 93 S.Ct. single most radi is the districts member 2348. require is one equity could cal that only imposed set The initial after attack on herein chal which should be ting lenged grounds supportable other multimember dis districts was aside on by Supreme inadequate. carded inade supra. Whit Court as found alternatives Chavis, page quate. supra, v. Register, at See 403 U.S. White comb v. Legislature was, The Texas State there S.Ct. fore, any judicial pressure to not under having however, majority, found remaining down strike these districts challenged multi- unconstitutional single-member an favor of legislative all having districts member fact, plan.6 attorney gerrymander- found an unconstitutional smaller, admitted up ing its takes in Galveston populous less multimember districts myoptically ir- compass marches challenged (now Bar) in the case did remedy revocably Court towards degree the same of constitu imposed single member districts infirmity applicability tional nor under thought passing recom- such without the Whitcomb tests as Dallas Bexar as are mentioned mended alternatives Counties these words: In- Whitcomb. Court “Yes,

deed, before this Court we some evidence do have multimember question representa- less radical on the much districts with two or three surgery may disruptive Perhaps yet would corrective tives. we not have adequate population-wise point be a more cure. reached the than particular those districts think testimony There is uncontroverted single giving them about member adoption an all certainly I don’t want to advo- tricts. many plan operate would in districts point, I cate at this but I think submerge only to effective- recognize in mind what the Court has enjoyed ness now minorities. but, question, he cer- when raises this shows that in certain evidence further regardless tainly, may of what we con- plans submitted to districts clude as these two or multi- three plaintiffs are attacked some counties, I member district believe being by plain- as other unconstitutional thing apply does same not disagreement the tiffs. Such illustrates representatives, one has 11 as proof presented any one sin- lack of gle County, Bexar and another one plan member offers a better County.” as Dallas remedy any than another than therefore, thoughts I, other remedies for alternative available the ex- reiterate pressed my original this Court’s consideration. dissent that this judicial Court should exercise as much Supreme repeated- The Court has declaring possible as the restraint ly that District Courts admonished “ challenged districts unconstitutional. leg- pre-empt . not the . . should However, where, here, majority as the upon pol- ‘intrude islative task nor state ’ ” necessary, it of this Court has deemed icy necessary. more than . . Legislature every oppor- the should Weiser, supra, page v. White 412 U.S. at tunity alleged I to correct its mistakes. page Further, 2355. S.Ct. at firmly approach believe that such is the dissent, I have noted above this it is by Supreme mandated the Court. legislature when the to act to fails remedy approach special empha- constitutionally impermissible carries Such where, case, ap- judicial various condition that sis in this the relief becomes granting any at- the Since has not manner act- not conceive nor condone State regardless torney’s plaintiffs the ed in bad fees mandate faith or under reapportion legislative districts, I final outcome of this case. its can- by plain- plans competing plans proposed equiva- ber district and is thus the n legislative open attempt represent lent tiffs a clear intent. require- Supreme to obviate the Court’s The arbitrarily of this Court “color ment that the District Court be stating totally and without their reasons fashioning remedy. Indeed, blind” in ignored plans though all of these even (based upon political and color various approved by were also and endorsed considerations) plaintiffs have conscious party defendant, Dolph Honorable agreeing difficulty in found some Briscoe, democratically elected Gov- satisfactory plans. is, There on the oth- ernor of the State of Texas. In this that, hand, ample for er evidence connection, it should noted that delega- procedural failings, some comparison by plans submitted challenged tions from the now districts legislative delegations those submit- having pre- could have succeeded in plaintiffs adopted by ted this adopt vious session gerry- Court constitute an unabashed plans for In the member their districts. mandering in reverse to the elec- insure light activity, of such it must be conced- plaintiff groups tion ethnic given judiciary ed that a mandate exclusion of all others. so, Legislature accept to do would majority disregards .White the task and fashion the constitutional Weiser, supra, Whitcomb, supra, and all remedy required.7 There is no basis the other Court cases which presented reason or in the evidence compel perform- deference to the State contrary reach a conclusion. purely “legislative” ance tion, this func- request, the Pursuant to this Court’s imposition immediate orders plans for its State of Texas submitted specific single plans in seven of plan for Tarrant consideration. County challenged Yet, districts. for rea- approved recommended and illogical totally either sons or unex- legislative delegation— by its plained, permitted by State supporting against plan, seven one normal, Court to have its constitution- delegations and one undecided. The ally prerogative legislatively reserved following from the unani- Counties were redistricting County. Again, Galveston support in their of- mous State the reasons for this obvious discrimina- Jefferson, plans: fered Lubbock against tion the other seven districts is delega- McLennan. The three member satisfactory susceptible illumina- County split tion two for from Nueces support. clearly tion or It follows that against and one and the submitted urgency if there Court to plan consideration the the Court’s redistrict there like- Galveston majority. approved by the The State urgency wise is no for the Court to as- plan proposed also submitted a legisla- purely sume this unauthorized ap- Mexican-Ameriean tive function for the other Counties. dissenting proved Representative surely “pref- There must be a level of Truan. Carlos “prejudice” erence” which falls short of approval plans of these that will forever affect the relative representatives candidates, from each district chances of whether legislative expression Black, intent. Brown, Oriental, Arabic, clear Demo- Assuming cratic, Unida, even that the Court Republican, La Raza John holding male, Society, female, Catholic, of the affirms the Birch Jew, Protestant, young, handsome, are uncon- old, these multimember districts legislative courtesy stitutional, homely unlikely re- would or It other. seems single adoption quire mem- society of these our and the laws of human na- 7. The Texas Constitutional Convention is a recommendation the Constitutional considering complete currently State, in session Revision Commission that in its constitution, adopt revision of the State’s voluminous constitu- revised statewide an all specifically single-member legislative plan-. One items tion. before point total ever reach a ture will color, ethnic to differences blindness background, affluence, poverty, sex, religious age, or a affiliation,

variety and emotional other human persons fall who Those considerations. category type particular into a comprise than who less given can never electorate of a ability to of the absolute be assured represent them one of their

elect own multi- other halls or body. governmental is not This member changed judicial by a that can be a fact eliminating multimember decree substituting or

tricts arbitrarily drawn lines with districts Judges. uninitiated life tenured Federal Legislature simply can- The Courts repeal change inherent laws Rather, Su- human nature. reasoned, task

preme our Court has goal provide all the ultimate body politic effective access Tex-

political process. that in I submit exist,

as, voters now as the districts goal it is time have attained step surrogate Federal Democracy its course. run let

aside and CORPORATION,

MEREDITH Plaintiff, PUBLISHERS, ROW,

HARPER & Defendants, INC., al., et Sutton-Smith, an Individual

Brian corpora- Prentice-Hall, Inc., a Delaware

tion, Defendants Counter- Additional claim. R.O.

No. 73 Civ. 5446 Court,

United States District

S. D. York. New

May 29, 1974. notes cause were not into other occupations There were several factors which ren- in Lubbock. When the first easily dered the Mexican Americans more Mexican Americans obtained work in Lub- susceptible categorization. bock, one, For it was restricted to the construction they spoke Spanish time, all at sidewalks and brick streets. When the they were all of a proudly different culture from Lubbock Chamber of Commerce They congregate the American. tended to enumerated town’s in businesses a exclusively among promotional themselves, leaflet, which seems a recognition to have appeared Mexican of their lack of American establishment acceptance. significant years, Just as fact, was the list. It would be be- Anglo fact fore Americans South- first Mexican Americans would century enough west at the turn of had a become stable to accumulate strong tendency capital places to consider needed themselves su- own perior. excep- they Those in Lubbock were no business. Excluded as were from the tion, although they processes were no natural more American socialization homogeneous people they education, than the of an called American social interac- Mexican, they Anglo, equal basis, acceptance called themselves as tion on an as self-recognition much label of society, as of ex- individuals into stabilized very probably though clusion. Another in- their children would continue for decades segregation direct factor to live of the ear- as aliens in their own land. ly Mexican American Id. was that at 37-39 [footnotes farmers omitted]. mobile, Lubbock needed unstable cadre against County (and Discrimination Mexican- man from Lubbock only regarding appear Americans areas other than education state’s witness to district) continues. Browns were restricted to this testified that at least 25% picture population balconies motion theatres in the district would mid-1960’s, against refused admittance to solely vote a Mexican-American swimming public pools late as as two on the basis He further testi- race. years ago, away from other single-member turned fied that he favored public recently year. elections, last facilities as as tricts the school board testimony Moreover, give adequate representation uncontra- order to dicted that from to one-half one-fourth Finally, blacks and browns. when asked Anglo population regarding of Lubbock to comment the various fac- stereotypes still the Mexican- tors that contributed to the denial of an lazy, emotional, opportunity American as and unmo- part on the of Mexican- tivated. participate Americans to process, origin, he affirmed that ethnic economically depressed Mexican- running education, cost of for office largely American confined operated deny politi- all access to the portions to the north and northeast process. Cotrell, pro- cal Dr. Charles county. family The median income fessor of science who testified $3,500 per year in this area is lower expert plaintiffs, as an witness for the county than that in other areas of the concluded that and over of these families have in- minority popula- The Lubbock poverty come below the level. The Mex- tions are . . in a traditional ican-American home this section of posture. is, they That to- county are almost average is valued on tally quiescent. apparently There is $6,766.00, compared county- with the great hopelessness despair, deal of average $12,900. wide great deal of alienation reflected unexpectedly, pattern per- Not the attitude studies . There . . vasive racial discrimination and econom- very hope little far kind depression, particularly ic when it is im- participation partici- of real rate and posed on minority a Mexican-American pation politics. find, You ex- that constitutes of the coun- 17.33% ample, very few active mem- ty population, popula- affords the brown politics County. bers in in Lubbock tion, popula- as well as the black 7.4%

Case Details

Case Name: Graves v. Barnes

Court Name: District Court, W.D. Texas

Date Published: May 28, 1974

Citation: 378 F. Supp. 640

Docket Number: Civ. A. A-71-CA 142 to A-71-CA-145, A-73-CA-115, A-73-CA-146, A-73-CA-155

Court Abbreviation: W.D. Tex.