City Of Mobile V. Bolden Flashcards
What was the outcome of Mobile v Bolden?
The Supreme Court ruled that disproportionate effects alone, without intentional discrimination, is not enough to establish a claim of racial discrimination affecting voting
What is Mobile’s political system
A three member commission elected at large (The entire city vote for each commissioner), the commission jointly exercises all legislative, executive, and administrative power in the city
Prior to the Enactment of the voting rights act of 1965, what was the dynamic of election outcomes in mobile
The majority white electorate dictated the outcome of citywide elections. In addition, in the 1901 state constitution disenfranchise blacks and poor whites
What barriers did African Americans face in electing a candidate of their choice to the city commission
African-Americans faced barriers becoming candidates because of financial and strategic demands of citywide elections, Plus the majority started shifting towards the republican party
What case did the plaintiffs file
lawyers brought a class action lawsuit in the federal district courts against the city and incumbent commissioners. The plaintiffs argued that the at-large election of city commissioners diluted the black vote
What laws did the at-large city commissioner election violate
According to the plaintiffs, city commissioner elections violated the 14th and 15th amendment as well as section 2 of the voting rights act of 1965
What is the constitutional question
If the at-large system violated the 14th or 15th amendment or the voting rights act
What was the opinion of the court
In 6 - 3 decision with plurality opinion, just a Stewart concluded that the 15th amendment was not violated. In order to violate the 15th amendment racially discriminatory motivation is necessary for the amendment to be violated by black Americans have the freedom to vote, the amendment does not guarantee descriptive representation for candidates elected. The courtalso stated that black Americans in Mobile could register and vote without hindrance.
What did the district court decide on the case
The district court held that at-large electoral systems violated the 15th amendment and also discriminated against black Americans in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. The Court then ordered the commission to be dismantled and replaced by a mayor and city Council from single-member districts
“ without hindrance”
The Supreme Court held that there was no official obstacle for black Americans to become candidates and run for election in the commission
What was the courts opinion on the 14th amendment claims
The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment does not require proportional representation. Only if there is purposeful discrimination can there be a violation of the equal protection clause, disproportionate effects alone or insufficient to establish a claim of unconstitutional racial vote dilution
Who did the Supreme Court give the case to?
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the lower court for settlement
“ smoking gun” letter
The letter had been discovered that was written by one of the mobile lawyers and congressman Frederick G Bromberg to that the Alabama legislature advocated for the at-large system in order to prevent black Americans from holding office
What type of updates did congress make to section 2 of the voting rights act
Congress amended the voting rights act changing the prohibition against discriminatory intent to creation of discriminatory results standard for use in a valuation of forms of government or electoral practices
What did the court have to say about the claim that violated the 15th amendment?
The Court held that the Fifteenth Amendment did not include the right to descriptive representation and that only purposefully discriminatory denials of the freedom to vote on the basis of race demanded constitutional remedie
