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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

43aAppendix D2. Gingles II: Political Cohesion of Hispanic Votersa. Methodologies: Homogeneous, EcologicalRegression, and Ecological InferenceDr. Engstrom applied three accepted methods ofstatistical analysis to Irving’s election data 13 -homogeneousprecinct analysis (“HPA”), ecological regression (“ER”),and ecological inference (“EI”)-to determine whetherHispanic voters vote cohesively. (Pl.’s Ex. 25, at 4.) HPAand ER were both approved in Gingles and have beenutilized by numerous courts in Voting Rights Act cases.Gingles, 478 U.S. at 53 n. 20, 106 S.Ct. 2752. Recently,EI has been used to supplement evidence derived fromHPA and ER. See e.g., United States v. Village of PortChester, No. 06 Civ. 15173(SCR), 2008 WL 190502, at *11(S.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 2008); United States v. City of Euclid,580 F.Supp.2d 584, 596 (N.D.Ohio 2008).HPA simply reports the percentage of the votesreceived by a candidate withing the precincts in whicha particular group constitutes over 90% of the peoplereceiving ballots. (Id. at 5.) There are no homogenousHispanic precincts in any of these elections in Irving, so13. Both Dr. Engstrom and Dr. Alford utilized SSRV data,prepared by Mr. Ely based on precinct level election returns andlists of people who received ballots provided by the Dallas CountyDepartment of Elections, to analyze the candidate preferences ofHispanic and non-Hispanic voters. (Trial Tr. vol. 1, 200, Feb. 17.)Spanish surname matching is the norm for this type of analysis,and in Dr. Engstrom’s opinion it is the best measure of the Hispanicvoters in each voting precinct. (Id. at 201-02; PL’s Ex. 25, at 4.)
44aAppendix Dthis methodology cannot be applied to derive estimatesof Hispanic voter’s candidate preferences.Unlike HPA, ER addresses mixed precincts-it takesinto account the votes cast and the ethnic compositionof all the precincts. (Trial Tr. vol. 1, 205, Feb. 17.) ER isessentially based on a scatter plot in which the horizontalaxis reflects the Hispanic percentage of total voters (thepercentage of voters that had Spanish surnames receivingballots in each of the precincts) and the vertical axis showsthe percent of the vote received by the Hispanic candidate.(Id. at 206.) A straight line, called the line of best fit, isplotted through the data points with the least possibledeviation from the points. (Id.) But Dr. Engstrom criticizeswhat he calls the linearity assumption implicit in the line ofbest fit: ER in effect assumes that the behavior of Hispanicvoters is the same throughout precincts, regardless of thecomposition of the precincts. (Id. at 208-09.) Additionally,this methodology in some cases may result in estimatesthat may go below zero or above 100 for a given precinct.(Id. at 209.)Although HPA and ER were both approved in Ginglesand have been utilized by numerous courts in VotingRights Act cases, in Dr. Engstrom’s opinion the EI methodprovides the best available tool for analysis where only oneminority group is being examined. (Trial Tr. vol. 1, 212-14,Feb. 17.) This methodology was developed subsequent tothe Gingles decision, and was designed specifically for thepurpose of arriving at estimates in this type of case. (Id.at 209.) EI is similar to ER, but abandons the assumptionof linearity that ER relies upon. (Id.) EI also appliesa principle called the method of bounds to constrain
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 and 84: 34aAppendix DDr. Rives attempts to
Page 85 and 86: 36aAppendix Dwith sampling error ac
Page 87 and 88: 38aAppendix DIn his expert report,
Page 89 and 90: 40aAppendix DAs Dr. Rives pointed o
Page 91: 42aAppendix DC. Gingles II & III-Ra
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?