Quilter v. Voinovich
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
*1035OPINION
MOORE, Circuit Judge.
The question before this court is whether the Ohio Apportionment Board’s consideration of race in its 1992 redistricting plan violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We hold that because the plaintiffs have failed to make a threshold showing that the defendants subordinated traditional districting principles to consideration of race, strict scrutiny of the challenged districts is not applicable. Applying rational basis scrutiny, we conclude that the plan does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Craig v. BorenSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kucinich v. Defense Finance and Accounting ServiceDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2002
- Wilson v. KasichOhio Supreme Court · 2012
- Cromartie v. HuntDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2000
- Cromartie v. HuntDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2000
- Dickson v. RuchoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.