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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

35aAppendix Dgreater than) the city-wide average in the districts thatalready have the heaviest concentrations of the Hispanicpopulation.2. Reliability of ACS Dataa. Sampling ErrorDr. Rives testified that the ACS data utilized by Mr.Ely cannot be considered highly accurate and should notbe relied upon. (Trial Tr. vol. 1, 76-77, Feb. 18.) He firstwarns that ACS data can be subject to significant levelsof sampling error because the sample sizes are small. (Id.at 78; Defs.’ Ex. 4, at 11-12.) The one-year ACS surveysamples approximately 1/1000 people, whereas the Censuslong form samples approximately 1/8 people. (Trial Tr.vol. 1, 129-130, Feb. 17.) Dr. Rives also contended thatthe Census Bureau cautions data users to consider ACSsampling errors when using ACS estimates by including amargin of error with each value in the ACS table. (Defs.’Ex. 4, at 11.)Mr. Ely defends the ACS survey data, claiming that itis highly accurate. He argues that the ACS is conductedwith a rigorously researched sampling frame and surveymodel, it is put together by an organization that knowsthe process, huge investment has been made in conductingit, everything is done according to normal statisticalprocedures, and it is ultimately the best availableinformation about current demographic characteristics.(Trial Tr. vol. 1, 132, Feb. 17.) Additionally, Mr. Elysuggests that the fact that all the ACS data is reported
36aAppendix Dwith sampling error actually makes the data more reliable,because the margin of error serves as a measure thatcan be applied to judge its statistical accuracy relative toother data sources. For the reasons enumerated by Mr.Ely as well as the Census Bureau’s reliance on ACS data(as discussed infra, section III.B.2.d), the Court finds thatACS data is accurate and reliable.b. Discrepancy in 2006 and 2007 ACS FiguresDr. Rives also explained that the numbers providedin the ACS are “point estimates,” which is the best singlevalue provided by the Census Bureau for the characteristicin question (here, HCVAP). Every point estimate issubject to a margin of error that is always published bythe Census Bureau along with the point estimate. (TrialTr. vol. 1, 78, Feb. 18.) Adding and subtracting the marginof error from the point estimate provides a range. Thatrange falls within a 90% confidence interval, i.e., thereis a 90% chance that the range surrounding the pointestimate contains the truly accurate value. (Id.) The 2006ACS lists the Hispanic population in Irving as 85,960and the margin of error is 10,595. Thus, there is a 90%chance that the actual Hispanic population in Irving fallssomewhere between 96,555 and 75,365. In 2007, the ACSpoint estimate for Irving’s Hispanic population was 75,084with a margin of error of 8,120. Comparing 2006 ACS datato 2007 ACS data, Dr. Rives argued, demonstrates thatgrowth rates derived from ACS data should not be reliedupon. Dr. Rives suggested that the 11,000 person changein the point estimate between 2006 and 2007 reflectssignificant sampling error in combination with a declinein the Hispanic population in Irving. (Id. at 79-80.)
Page 3 and 4:
iiPARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGAND RULE
Page 5:
ivTable of ContentsPageREASONS FOR
Page 11:
xCited AuthoritiesStatutes and Othe
Page 14 and 15:
1PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARIP
Page 16 and 17:
3The Court should grant the petitio
Page 18 and 19:
5has “an obligation to explain to
Page 20 and 21:
7because the City has substantially
Page 22 and 23:
9City of IrvingPopulation, Voting A
Page 24 and 25:
11The district court granted summar
Page 26 and 27:
13I. This Petition Presents An Impo
Page 28 and 29:
15First, the issue has increasingly
Page 30 and 31:
17wards had far more eligible voter
Page 32 and 33:
19or practice, they cannot claim to
Page 34 and 35: 21This case—in which the choice b
Page 36 and 37: 23two, five, or ten, or one-half.
Page 38 and 39: 25In Chen, the Fifth Circuit reache
Page 40: 27Importantly, then, the Fourteenth
Page 43 and 44: 30Tennessee voters’ dilution chal
Page 45 and 46: 32Under the Plan, as noted above, D
Page 47 and 48: 34slightly larger than 9.9%—prese
Page 49 and 50: 1aAppendix AAPPENDIX
Page 51 and 52: 2aAppendix APER CURIAM: *This case
Page 53 and 54: 4aAPPENDIX B — Appendix MEMORANDU
Page 55 and 56: 6aAppendix Bpopulation numbers are
Page 57 and 58: 8aAppendix Bwhich total population
Page 59 and 60: 10aAppendix Bthe court does acknowl
Page 61 and 62: 12aAppendix CON PETITION FOR REHEAR
Page 63 and 64: 14aAppendix DIrving’s at-large el
Page 65 and 66: 16aAppendix Dother things, the at-l
Page 67 and 68: 18aAppendix DThornburg v. Gingles,
Page 69 and 70: 20aAppendix Dfailed to establish a
Page 71 and 72: 22aAppendix Dcomplying with the Gin
Page 73 and 74: 24aAppendix Done-hundred percent co
Page 75 and 76: 26aAppendix Dhis opinion that would
Page 77 and 78: 28aAppendix Dto estimate the 2008 H
Page 79 and 80: 30aAppendix Dvotes of Hispanics hav
Page 81 and 82: 32aAppendix Daverage household size
Page 83: 34aAppendix DDr. Rives attempts to
Page 87 and 88: 38aAppendix DIn his expert report,
Page 89 and 90: 40aAppendix DAs Dr. Rives pointed o
Page 91 and 92: 42aAppendix DC. Gingles II & III-Ra
Page 93 and 94: 44aAppendix Dthis methodology canno
Page 95 and 96: 46aAppendix Dthat the confidence th
Page 97 and 98: 48aAppendix Dto Dr. Alford’s hypo
Page 99 and 100: 50aAppendix DD. Totality of the Cir
Page 101 and 102: 52aAppendix DThe Court concludes th
Page 103 and 104: 54aAppendix DNotably, James Dickens
Page 105 and 106: 56aAppendix D1231, 1245-46, 173 L.E
Page 107 and 108: 58aAppendix D2. Proof of Changed De
Page 109 and 110: 60aAppendix DPlaintiff has not empl
Page 111 and 112: 62aAppendix Dthe way in which the v
Page 113 and 114: 64aAppendix Dthe requirement that t
Page 115 and 116: 66aAPPENDIX E — RELEVANT Appendix
Page 117: 68aAppendix Eof insurrection or reb
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?