Legal Opinion
Cottier v. City of Martin
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided December 5, 2006No. Civ. 02-5021-KESPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SCHREIER, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs allege that the City of Martin Ordinance 122 dilutes the voting strength of Indians by fragmenting the Indian voters into three wards, which has the result and effect of denying the right of Indians to vote on account of race in violation of §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965(VRA). This is plaintiffs’ “result” claim. Plaintiffs also allege that Ordinance 122 was enacted and is being maintained with the discriminatory purpose of denying or abridging the right of Indians to vote on account of race or color or membership in a language…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Thornburg v. GinglesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Johnson v. De GrandySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- City of Rome v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Voinovich v. QuilterSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. Marengo County CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cottier v. City of MartinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010
- Cottier v. City of MartinDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2007
- Luna v. Cnty. of KernDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2018
- Cottier v. City of MartinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Cottier v. City of MartinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.