The conservative majority of the court made it much harder for plaintiffs to prove that race, not partisanship, is the reason a given district has been gerrymandered.
Justice Samuel Alito argued courts should assume legislatures act in good faith; absence of an alternative map gerrymandered for partisanship validates constitutionality based on partisanship, not race.
Justice Elena Kagan dissented, criticizing the good-faith assumption and the requirement of an alternative map. She highlighted the violation of accepting district court decisions unless clearly erroneous.
Collection
[
|
...
]