In the case of Shaw v. Reno (1993), the Supreme Court ruled that
a. majority-minority districts were not a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment.
b. majority-minority districts were unconstitutional.
c. minority-dominated congressional districts were a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
d. minority-dominated congressional districts were not a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
e. redrawing voting district lines from time to time is constitutional.
Question 2
A majority-minority district is
a. a congressional district designed to include so many members of minority groups so that the opportunity for a minority candidate to be elected is greatly improved.
b. a congressional district designed to include so many members of majority groups so that the opportunity for a majority candidate to be elected is greatly improved.
c. a congressional district designed to make it very difficult for a minority candidate to avoid a run-off election.
d. a congressional district designed to make it very difficult for a majority candidate to avoid a run-off election.
e. a process of redrawing voting district lines from time to time and adjusting the number of representatives allotted each state.
Portuguese Warrior Surrounded by Manillas, Court of Benin, Nigeria.
The vast majority of older adults live in their own homes, even when they need special equipment or ...
Using a bright light makes seeing where the smoke is coming from easier. In this case, smoke was ...
The breaking down of a sound—in this case, the sound of a clarinet—into its component sine waves ...
5-4 The relationship between vapor pressure and temperature—in this case for water. As the ...
The Impact of Cross-Ethnic Friendships on Minority Students’ Well-Being