Abbott v. Perez

In Abbott v. Perez (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed challenges to Texas’s 2013 redistricting maps. After the 2011 maps were found to be discriminatory, a federal court drew interim maps for the 2012 elections. In 2013, the Texas legislature permanently adopted maps largely mirroring the interim plans. Plaintiffs, including Shannon Perez, alleged the 2013 maps perpetuated the discriminatory intent of the 2011 maps, violating the Voting Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision by Justice Alito, held that the lower court failed to accord the legislature a presumption of legislative good faith. It reversed and remanded, upholding all districts except one state house district.

The Supreme Court reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. It upheld all challenged congressional and state house districts except Texas House District 90, which was remanded for further proceedings. The majority ruled that the 2013 legislature was entitled to a presumption of good faith.

Whether the Texas legislature's adoption of interim court-ordered maps cleansed them of any discriminatory taint from the 2011 maps, and whether the district court erred in finding intentional discrimination without giving proper deference to the legislative process.

The decision made it significantly harder for plaintiffs to prove discriminatory intent in redistricting cases, effectively insulating legislatures from liability when they repurpose court-drawn interim maps. It limited the scope of the Voting Rights Act and raised concerns about the protection of minority voting rights, influencing subsequent gerrymandering litigation across the United States.