Abstract
Though theory and empirical evidence suggest that minorities are less likely to be represented under multimember districting plans than under single-member plans, there are reasons to wonder whether this logic and evidence are applicable to the political party case. Evidence from multiple tests shows that, as a general proposition, minority party strength in state legislatures is not diluted by multimember districts. Reasons include concentration of the minority party in areas using multimember districts and the use of multimember districts for only a portion of all districts. One of the unsettled concerns in the apportionment revolution of the last 20 years is the status of multimember districts. In specific instances, the Supreme Court has declared that multimember districts were created or maintained for the purpose of illegal discrimination against racial or linguistic minorities (White v. Regester 412 U.S. 755; Rogers v. Lodge 458
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
