gomillion versus lightfoot or the situation in mississippi in 1966. the argument there is that you have diminished the political power of a racial group by the way you have drawn the lines. here it's not that. it's not diminishing the political power but that you sent a certain message, and that message, as she says, reinforces that members of the same racial group, right, think alike. share the same political interests and will prefer the same type of candidates at the polls. that kind of racial stereotyping creates an injury under the 14th amendment and they cite gomillion versus lightfoot as an example of that. right. gomillion versus lightfoot, remember the story there is that they excise pretty much all the african-americans from tuskegee. here it's not that they excised all the whites from the i-85 district. in fact, this district -- if this is about segregation, right, let alone political apartheid, these districts are about, roughly, just over 50% of the voters in the district were african-american. they were drawn in order to satisfy the voti

you saw the 15th amendment with gomillion voersz lightfoot. that's a special set of facts. up until the 1980s and -- well, and then with the case of mobil versus boldin, the court explained that the constitutional constraints on redistricting plants when it comes to equal protection are similar or can be similar to other types of unconstitutional state action. so redistricting which is intended to disadvantage a minority community. right? just to discriminate against a racial group. any racial group. if you have discriminatory purpose and discriminatory effect, that that would vileate the equal protection clause in the 14th amendment. 2340u7 now, if you had random districts, based and political subdivision lines and it has the effect of diluting the minority vote that doesn't necessarily violate the constitution. if as shown be in mississippi you set out to crack and pack the minority community so as to diminish their political influence, then nats the same problem as you would get in any other kind of situation under, for example, arlington heights. right? or washington ve

he also talks about more racially charged redistricting fights such as the 1960 gomillion v. lightfoot supreme court case in which the court found a district had been created to disenfranchise black voters. that case helped lead to the 1965 voting rights act outlawing discriminatory voting practices. columbia law school is located in new york city. this is a little over an hour. >> we're going to continue our discussion of redistricting law. last time we dealt with one person, one vote. we'll review those, and we'll also talk about sort of historical examples of gerrymandering. the word "gerrymander" comes from eldridge gerry, the anti-federalist governor of massachusetts who in 1812 passed a redistricting plan which looked like a salomon der. and it's because of that districting plan and in particular one of the districts in it, specifically this one right here, that we then had the term gerrymander coined. so if you look, this is a picture of massachusetts, and that was the district right here which aldridge gerry drew. despite the fact that the federalist had won more vote