Question

The U.S. Attorney General rejected a North Carolina congressional reapportionment plan because the plan created only one black-majority district. North Carolina submitted a second plan creating two black-majority districts. One of these districts was, in parts, no wider than the interstate road along which it stretched. Five North Carolina residents challenged the constitutionality of this unusually shaped district, alleging that its only purpose was to secure the election of additional black representatives. After a three-judge District Court ruled that they failed to state a constitutional claim, the residents appealed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Did the North Carolina residents' claim, that the State created a racially gerrymandered district, raise a valid constitutional issue under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?

Answer 1

Yes.

Step-by-step explanation:

The North Carolina residents' claim that the state created a racially gerrymand district raised a valid constitutional issue under the Fourteenth Amendment Protection Clause.

This is because, according to the court's interpretation, there were no compelling reasons for them to be in favor or against the division of North Carolina, from a racial point of view, which makes this division plan a neutral plan. However, the format of the district was something very unusual and bizarre, and it is impossible to say that this format was established so as not to separate voters from the region into groups related to the races of those voters.