petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to grant ... - Election Law Blog

18aAppendix DThornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 50-51, 106 S.Ct.2752, 92 L.Ed.2d 25 (1986). Failure to establish anyone of the Gingles factors by a preponderance of theevidence precludes a fi nding of vote dilution, because“[t]hese circumstances are necessary preconditions formultimember districts to operate to impair minorityvoters’ ability to elect representatives of their choice.” Id.at 50, 106 S.Ct. 2752.C. Totality of the CircumstancesIf all three Gingles requirements are established, acourt must next consider the “totality of circumstances”to determine whether members of a racial group haveless opportunity than other members of the electorateto participate in the political process and to electrepresentatives of their choice. League of United LatinAm. Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399, 425-26, 126 S.Ct.2594, 165 L.Ed.2d 609 (2006) (“LULAC”). The SenateJudiciary Committee Report accompanying the 1982amendments to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Actidentifies factors relevant to this inquiry. See S.Rep. No.97-417 (1982), reprinted in 1982 U.S.C.C.A.N. 177. Thislist of factors, however, is “neither comprehensive norexclusive.” Gingles, 478 U.S. at 45, 106 S.Ct. 2752. The“Senate factors” include:(1) the extent of any history of officialdiscrimination in the state or politicalsubdivision that touched the right of membersof the minority group to register, vote, orotherwise to participate in the democraticprocess;