Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Case Digests / Constitutional Law — equal protection — redistricting

Constitutional Law — equal protection — redistricting

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit


Constitutional Law — equal protection — redistricting

A deviation of 8.7 percent in aldermanic district size is insufficient to violate the Equal Protection Clause.

“The Equal Protection Clause principle of ‘one person, one vote’ requires that officials be elected from voting districts with substantially equal populations. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 577 (1964). Thus, ‘one man’s vote in a[n] … election is to be worth as much as another’s.’ Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 8 (1964). To achieve this result, the government must ‘make an honest and good-faith effort to construct its districts as nearly of equal population as is practicable,’ but mathematical precision is not required. Gaffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735, 743 (1973) (internal quotation marks omitted).”


13-2977 League of Women Voters of Chicago v. City of Chicago

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Coleman, J., Kanne, J.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *