From Shaw v. Reno to Miller v. Johnson: Minority Representation and State Compliance with the Voting Rights Act

In 1994, four federal district courts applied the tests setforth in Shaw v. Reno in order to rule on the constitutionalityof congressional districting schemes that were comprised, inpart, of "majority-minority" districts. The difference of opinionthat arose among the lower courts indicated that Shaw had setforth unclear standards for determining (I) what role the federalcourts should play in monitoring state redistricting practices,and (2) whether a remedial redistricting plan is a racial gerrymander.Also, the disagreements exposed the weakness of some of theassumptions on which voting rights analysis is grounded. InMiller v. Johnson, the Supreme Court sought to address the lowercourts' concerns. Nonetheless, voting rights jurisprudence remainsunclear regarding (I) what constitutes a valid claim of vote-dilution,and (2) whether voting should be perceived as a group or individualright.