last week the supreme court heard oral argument on two cases involving legislative injugeri mannedering. at issue in these cases is what -- this is just over an hour. >>> the argument in case number 13895. legislative black caucus in alabama versus alabama, the alabama democratic conference versus alabama. mr. pildes? >> mr. chief justice, if it may please to court, rigid racial targets to design all of its black districts based on mere racial statistics along and then -- meet those targets with atron initiating precision. racial quotas in the context of districting are a dangerous business. they can be a way of giving mean norths a phased voting, a fair opportunity to elect. but they can be an unnecessary way of packing voters in ways that polarize and divide us by race. >> your honor we understand that states are in a bind under the voting rights act of section 2. >> they have to hit the sweet spot without taking race predominantly under consideration. >> this has mapped out a path that states must take to both comply with their section 5 obligations not to use the excessive and unjus