Scott v. Germano, 1152

Citation85 S.Ct. 1525,14 L.Ed.2d 477,381 U.S. 407
Decision Date01 June 1965
Docket NumberNo. 1152,1152
PartiesWilliam J. SCOTT et al. v. Joseph GERMANO et al
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Don H. Reuben, Howard J. Trienens and D. Lawrence Gunnels, for appellants.

Bernard Kleiman and Lester Asher, for Germano and others.

William G. Clark, Atty. Gen. of Illinois, and Richard A. Michael, Asst. Atty. Gen., for Kerner and others.

PER CURIAM.

Upon remand of this case, Germano v. Kerner, 378 U.S. 560, 84 S.Ct. 1908, 12 L.Ed.2d 1034 (1964), for further proceedings consistent with the views stated in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 84 S.Ct. 1362, 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964), the District Court on January 22, 1965, entered a judgment declaring invalid Art. IV, § 6, of the Illinois Constitution, S.H.A. and Ill.Rev.Stat., c. 46, §§ 158—1 to 158—5 (1963), apportioning the Illinois Senate; directing that all members of the Illinois General Assembly be made parties defendant; and requiring that 'any implementation, amendment or substitution of all or part of the said defective portions' of the Illinois Constitution or legislation be submitted to it for approval before the holding of any election thereunder. It further held that if no such 'implementation, amendment or substitution' was submitted it would order the parties to show cause why all Illinois State Senators should not be elected from the State at large in the 1966 election and every four years thereafter.

In April 1964 the case of People ex rel. Engle v. Kerner was filed in the Circuit Court of Sangamon County, Illinois. It contested the composition of both houses of the General Assembly but was dismissed by the trial court. Upon appeal the Supreme Court of Illinois on February 4, 1965, held the composition of the Illinois Senate invalid; the court expressed confidence that the General Assembly would 'successfully perform its duty to enact a constitutionally valid plan during its current session' which expires July 1, 1965. However, the court retained jurisdiction of the case 'for the purpose of taking such affirmative action as may be necessary to insure that the 1966 election is pursuant to a constitutionally valid plan.' 32 Ill.2d 212, 225, 205 N.E.2d 33, 41.

On February 8, 1965, the appellants here moved that the United States District Court reconsider and vacate its order of January 22, 1965, and stay further proceedings in light of the Supreme Court of Illinois' opinion in Engle, supra. This the District Court refused to do. Direct appeal was perfected here, 28 U.S.C. § 1253 (1958 ed.), and the appellants have now moved to stay the judgment of the District Court.*

We believe that the District Court should have stayed its hand. The power of the judiciary of a State to require valid reapportionment or to formulate a valid redistricting plan has not only been recognized by this Court but appropriate action by the States in such cases has been specifically encouraged. State of Maryland Committee for Fair Representation v. Tawes, 377 U.S. 656, 676, 84 S.Ct. 1429, 1440, 12 L.Ed.2d 595 (1964); City of Scranton v. Drew, 379 U.S. 40, 85 S.Ct. 207, 13 L.Ed.2d 107 (1964), citing Butcher v. Bloom, 415 Pa. 438, 203 A.2d 556 (1964); Jackman v. Bodine, 43 N.J. 453, 473, 205 A.2d 713, 724 (1964). See also Kidd v. McCanless, 200 Tenn. 273, 292 S.W.2d 40 (1956), asd...

To continue reading

Request your trial
110 cases
  • Members of Cal. Democratic Cong. Delegation v. Eu
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • March 3, 1992
    ...in our next steps by numerous cases in which federal courts have abstained in voting rights matters. E.g., Scott v. Germano, 381 U.S. 407, 85 S.Ct. 1525, 14 L.Ed.2d 477 (1965); Badham, 721 F.2d at 1172; Duncan v. Poythress, 657 F.2d 691, 697 (5th Cir.1981), cert. dismissed, 459 U.S. 1012, 1......
  • Evans v. Buchanan, Civ. A. No. 1816-1822.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • April 10, 1981
    ...Court from Roger A. Akin, Deputy Attorney General, dated March 30, 1981 (Doc. No. 1038) at 2. 83 Cf. Scott v. Germano, 381 U.S. 407, 409-10, 85 S.Ct. 1525, 1526-27, 14 L.Ed.2d 477 (1965) (directing district court to give state authorities opportunity to develop timely reapportionment plan);......
  • Carter v. Chapman
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • February 23, 2022
    ...not to act, it becomes the judiciary's role to determine the appropriate redistricting plan."); Scott v. Germano , 381 U.S. 407, 409, 85 S.Ct. 1525, 14 L.Ed.2d 477 (1965) (per curiam ) ("The power of the judiciary of a State to require valid reapportionment or to formulate a valid redistric......
  • McConchie v. Scholz
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • October 19, 2021
    ...of the State * * * rather than of a federal court." Chapman , 420 U.S. at 27, 95 S.Ct. 751 ; see also Scott v. Germano , 381 U.S. 407, 409, 85 S.Ct. 1525, 14 L.Ed.2d 477 (1965) ("The power of the judiciary of a State to require valid reapportionment or to formulate a valid redistricting pla......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT