News Release

Civil rights conference to address redistricting reform,
possible consequences for minority voters on Feb. 3

CHAPEL HILL – Donna Brazile, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee’s Voting Rights Institute and former campaign manager to the Gore-Lieberman campaign, will give the keynote address at a Feb. 3 conference examining redistricting issues.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Law’s Center for Civil Rights will host the national conference, "Who Draws the Lines? The Consequences of Redistricting Reform for Minority Voters." The location is the William and Ida Friday Center for Continuing Education, and the daylong conference begins at 9 a.m. Cost is $35 for the public, $10 for students and $75 for lawyers requesting CLE credit.

Lawyers, social scientists, policy-makers and activists are among those expected to attend the event, which will address redistricting reform and its consequences for minority voters. Every 10 years, all 50 state legislatures must redraw the boundaries of their state and congressional legislative districts. Concerns focus on whether legislators adjust boundaries in favor of one party over another, and whether the resulting elections are appropriately competitive. 

Several different methods for redistricting exist among the states, each with different procedures and criteria. Conference presenters and participants will explore possible legal, social and political solutions, as well as the current laws governing redistricting.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to rule on the validity of Texas’ 2003 congressional redistricting plan, a measure some believe resulted in the ouster of five Democratic incumbents and helped solidify Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives. In response to the decision to hear the Texas redistricting case, Jackson v. Perry, No. 05-276, UNC’s Center for Civil Rights recently submitted an amicus brief in the Supreme Court.

The center’s amicus brief argues that the Voting Rights Act should protect election districts that provide fair representation for minority voters, even when those districts are less than 50 percent African-American in population. The brief also provides the Supreme Court with a Dec. 2, 2005, opinion by a three-judge redistricting court in Wake County, which upheld a de facto majority African-American state legislative district in two of the state’s counties. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled to be heard in the Supreme Court March 1.

The issues at the forefront of the Texas case – namely legislative action, often under the umbrella of partisan politics, and its influence on minority populations – have prompted some states to experiment with redistricting reforms such as turning the boundary-drawing decisions over to independent redistricting commissions.

Some leading scholars have said, however, that the rush to commissions is based on largely unexplored assumptions, causing reformists to adopt the wrong solution. Specifically, opponents of independent redistricting commissions claim that commissions may have the unintended effect of making it more difficult for minority populations to have a voice in redistricting, possibly further reducing their opportunities to elect representatives of choice.

More information on the Center for Civil Rights is available at www.law.unc.edu/civilrights. To register for the conference, call (919) 962-1277.

- 30 -

School of Law contact: Matt Marvin, (919) 962-4125 or mmarvin@email.unc.edu

News Services contact: Deb Saine, (919) 962-8415 or deborah_saine@unc.edu