Did the 4th Circuit Wrongly Decide in This Case? (Table of Contents for Part III)

Did the 4^th Circuit Wrongly Decide Raleigh Wake Citizens Association?

If you have no legal experience… perfect! This is a great “getting your feet wet” case for reading legal decisions! This post series will analyze the recent ruling by the 4th Circuit section by section, while referencing the dissent as well as the majority opinion. For those who are not experienced reading a legal decision:

-I have prefaced my analysis with a brief explanation of each section of the decision and why it’s important

-I have opted to use simple page numbers as citations, rather than proper legal format

-I have tried to keep the legal jargon to a minimum.

-And, where possible, you’ll see bulleted lists like this one. 

-For these posts, I’ll also critique the majority opinion as necessary

Part III – Analysis

This is the heart of the case, where the court explains its legal reasoning. I’m not going to detail everything in this Part of the opinion, because affirming a lower court is essentially the appellate court saying “They got this right / didn’t get it wrong, so we’re not changing anything.” It’s the time-consuming part of following a legal opinion, as you’ll see after the jump. Keep reading, though – this is also the fun part!

The analysis section of the majority opinion (which looks worse than it is, I swear!) is laid out as follows:

Part III-A: Which precedents the court used in analyzing this case

Part III-B1: Mistaken standard of review by district court

Part III-B2: Legal elements

Part III-B3: Weight and value of evidence presented

Part III-B4: Asserts that district court decided wrongly

Part III-C1: Authority to Rule, Rather than Remand

Part III-C2: Restates facts and trial testimony in support of ruling

Part III-C3: “One person, one vote” analysis – Illegitimate Factors

Part III-C4: “One person, one vote” analysis – Justifications on Pretext & Legitimate Factors

Part III-C5: Reversal of district court

Part III-C6: Deference of ruling on urban vs. rural apportionment

Part III-D: State-level “One person, one vote” claim

Part IV: “No clear error” in district court rejection of racial gerrymandering claim

Part IV-A: Elements of claim, and standard of review

Part IV-B: Explanation of affirmance

Part V: Judicial Order