Perry v. Perez

Questions presented

SCOTUS records

The Texas Legislature enacted new electoral maps for the Texas House, Texas Senate, and U.S. House of Representatives in light of population changes in the 2010 census. Texas is actively seeking judicial preclearance of those maps under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The question presented is whether, while preclearance remains pending, another district court may order the use of judicially drawn "interim" electoral maps that give no deference to the State's duly-enacted maps, are not premised on any actual or likely violation of law, and are based on nothing more than the court's own notion of sound public policy and "the collective public good."

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The case involved the redistricting of Texas's congressional and state legislative districts following the 2010 census. The Texas Legislature had drawn new maps, but these were challenged in court for allegedly violating the Voting Rights Act. As a result, interim maps were created by a federal district court to be used in upcoming elections while awaiting preclearance from another federal court as required under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether this lower court acted appropriately when it drew its own interim electoral maps instead of using those proposed by the state legislature. In an unsigned per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court held that although courts can draw interim plans if necessary, they should defer to any aspects of a state's plan that do not violate statutory or constitutional provisions unless there is evidence suggesting otherwise.