Kilgarlin v. Hill/Concurrence Douglas

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
930005Kilgarlin v. Hill — ConcurrenceWilliam O. Douglas
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
Concurring Opinion
Douglas

United States Supreme Court

386 U.S. 120

Kilgarlin  v.  Hill

 Argued: Feb. 20, 1967. --- Decided: April 10, 1967


Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring.

While I join the opinion of the Court, I reserve decision on one aspect of the problem concerning multi-member districts.

Under the present regime each voter in the district has one vote for each office to be filled. This allows the majority to defeat the minority on all fronts. It is suggested that in multi-member districts each person be able to vote for only one legislator, the theory being that in that way a minority, either political or otherwise, would have a chance to elect at least one representative.

I am not sure in my own mind how this problem should be resolved. But in view of the fact that appellants claim that multi-member districts of Texas are constructed in such a manner that Negroes are effectively disenfranchised, I would reserve that question for consideration when the case is once again before the District Court.

Mr. Justice CLARK would affirm the judgment of the District Court.

Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice STEWART would affirm the judgment of the District Court in its entirety, on the basis of the reasoning contained in Mr. Justice HARLAN's dissenting opinion in Swann v. Adams, 385 U.S. 440, 447, 87 S.Ct. 569, 574, 17 L.Ed.2d 501.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse