Burgess Owens: “Returning to quote Justice Ginsburg: Finally State legislatures may recognize communities that have a particular racial…”

“Returning to quote Justice Ginsburg: Finally State legislatures may recognize communities that have a particular racial or ethnic makeup, even in the absence of any compulsion do so, in order to account for interests common to or shared by persons grouped together. When members of a racial group live together in one community, a reapportionment plan that concentrates members of the group in one district and excludes them from others may reflect wholly legitimate purposes. Therefore, the fact that the Georgia General Assembly took account of race in drawing district lines--a fact not in dispute--does not render the State's plan invalid. To offend the Equal Protection Clause, all agree the legislature had to do more than consider race. How much more, is the issue that divides the Court today. Continuing to quote Justice Ginsburg, her dissent: We say once again what has been said on many occasions: Reapportionment is primarily the duty and responsibility of the State through its legislature or other body, rather than of a Federal court. Districting inevitably has sharp political impact, and political decisions must be made by those charged with the task. District lines are drawn to accommodate a myriad of factors, geographic economic, historical and political, and State legislatures, as arenas of compromise, electoral accountability, are best positioned to mediate competing claims; courts, with a mandate merely to adjudicate, are ill-equipped for this task.…”