Supreme Court of the United States
Gill v. Whitford
June 18, 2018585 U.S. 48
Summary
The Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing to challenge Wisconsin’s 2011 legislative redistricting plan, vacating the district court’s judgment and remanding for further proceedings to allow proof of a particularized injury. The Court emphasized that standing requires showing that a voter’s own vote is diluted by being packed or cracked, which the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate.
Holding
- Did the plaintiffs have Article III standing to challenge the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s Act 43?. No, the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing.
Docket 16-1161
Cited authorities
- Wis. Stat. § 4.01
- Wis. Stat. §4.001
- Wis. Stat. §§ 4.009
- 28 U.S.C. §2284
- 28 U.S.C. §1253
- 82 U. Chi. L. Rev. 831
- 83 Tex. L. Rev. 781
Cited by
- League of Women Voters of Ohio v. Ohio Redistricting Comm. (Slip Opinion)
- City and County of San Francisco v. Jefferson B. Sessions, State of California v. Jefferson B. Sessions
- Lyman v. Baker
- National Association of Consumer Advocates v. Kraninger
- League of United Latin American Citizens, League of United Latin American Citizens of Texas, Joseph C. Parker, Jr…
- State of Texas v. the United States of America, Karla Perez, Defendant-Intervenors, and State of New Jersey…
- Anne Harding v. County of Dallas, Texas
- Lionel Lopez v. Greg Abbott