Mobile v. Bolden

Mobile v. Bolden
Argued March 19, 1979
Reargued October 29, 1979
Decided April 22, 1980
Full case nameCity of Mobile, Alabama, et al. v. Wiley L. Bolden, et al.
Citations446 U.S. 55 (more)
100 S. Ct. 1490; 64 L. Ed. 2d 47
Case history
PriorJudgment for plaintiffs, 423 F. Supp. 384 (S.D. Ala. 1976); affirmed, 571 F.2d 238 (5th Cir. 1978), probable jurisdiction noted, 439 U.S. 815 (1978).
Holding
Facially neutral electoral districting is constitutional, even if the at-large elections dilute the voting strength of black citizens.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
PluralityStewart, joined by Burger, Powell, Rehnquist
ConcurrenceBlackmun (in result)
ConcurrenceStevens (in judgment)
DissentBrennan
DissentWhite
DissentMarshall
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. XIV, XV; 79 Stat. 437, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973

Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that disproportionate effects alone, absent purposeful discrimination, are insufficient to establish a claim of racial discrimination affecting voting.[1]

In Gomillion v. Lightfoot (1960), which challenged new city boundaries that excluded virtually all black voters from Tuskegee, Alabama, the court had held that creating electoral districts which disenfranchised blacks violated the Fifteenth Amendment.[2]

  1. ^ Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980). Public domain This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
  2. ^ Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960).

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search