Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chapman v. Meier

District Court, D. North Dakota

Decided April 29, 1974No. Civ. 4664Published

1DissentBright, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent.

Today, a reconstituted majority of this court permanently adopts the stopgap apportionment scheme for North Dakota’s State Legislative Assembly known as the Dobson Plan, in the face of our earlier order1 which stated:

We approve the Dobson Plan of reapportionment at this time for the 1972 election only. This court retains jurisdiction of this cause for the purpose of adopting a different plan of reapportionment which will not be hampered by considerations of impending elections. [Chapman v. Meier, 372 F.Supp. 363, 367 (D.N.D., filed June 30, 1972)].

My colleagues thus…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  4. White v. RegesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Whitcomb v. ChavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API