Democrats in control of the New Jersey Legislature designed a plan for congressional redistricting in the state which the outgoing Democratic governor signed into law. Even though the district populations differed by less than one percent from each other, they were clearly drawn to maximize Democratic power in the state.
Did the gerrymandering in the reapportionment plan violate Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution?
Even though the population differences in the districts were slight, the Court held that they were unconstitutional because they "were not the result of a good-faith effort to achieve population equality." Justice Brennan upheld past Court decisions (Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, 1973, and Wesberry v. Sanders, 1964) and argued that relying on a strict numerical standard of populations to assess district equality would be misguided.
Decisions
Decision: 5 votes for Daggett, 4 vote(s) against Legal provision: Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 1: Composition of the House of Representatives
Sort by Ideology
Full Opinion by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.
