Jenkins v. Red Clay Consol. School Dist. Bd. of Educ.
| Decision Date | 19 August 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 92-7025,92-7025 |
| Parties | 85 Ed. Law Rep. 690 Alden JENKINS; Harlan Roberts; Gwendolyn Neal, v. RED CLAY CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION; David C. Allen; Charles M. Cavanaugh; Richard P. Eckman; Susan A. Mathe; Sherilynn Jackson; William E. Manning; Patricia Reinbold; Carol Scotton; Irwin Becnel, Alden Jenkins; Harlan Roberts; Gwendolyn Neal, acting on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Brenda Wright (argued), Frank R. Parker, James J. Halpert, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Washington, DC, Gary W. Aber, Heiman, Aber & Goldlust, Wilmington, DE, for appellants.
Thomas J. Manley (argued), John R. McArthur, Hunton & Williams, Raleigh, NC, M. Duncan Grant, James J. Sullivan, Jr., Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz, Wilmington, DE, for appellees.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1112
II. SECTION 2 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT 1113
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW 1116
IV. THE DISTRICT COURT'S OPINION 1117
V. THE MERITS 1118
A. INTRODUCTION 1118
B. WHITE BLOC VOTING 1118
1. The Supreme Court Standard 1118
2. The Plaintiff's Evidence Of White Bloc Voting 1119
3. The District Court's Evaluation of the Plaintiffs' 1121
Evidence
4. Validity of The District Court's Plurality Win Theory 1122
5. Black Voters' Candidates of Choice 1124
a. Introduction 1124
b. Were the Black Candidates the Candidates of Choice 1126
Among the Black Voters of Red Clay?
c. Were Any of the White Candidates in White Versus 1128
White Elections the MinorityPreferred Candidates?
d. Can the Court Determine a Pattern Based on the 1130
Limited Number of Elections Addressed by the
Plaintiffs?
C. SUSTAINED PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION 1131
D. POLITICAL COHESIVENESS OF THE BLACK RED CLAY VOTERS 1133
E. TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES 1135
VI. CONCLUSION 1136
----------
Before: BECKER, MANSMANN and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges.
This appeal arises from a class action challenge brought pursuant to Sec. 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 79 Stat. 437, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973 (1988) ("the Act"), to the at-large scheme for electing members of the school board for the Red Clay Consolidated School District in Delaware. The three named plaintiffs, Alden Jenkins, Harlan Roberts, and Gwendolyn Neal, brought the action on behalf of all eligible black voters in the district. They allege that the current method of electing the Red Clay Board of Education unlawfully dilutes the voting strength of the black citizens of Red Clay, thereby depriving them of an equal opportunity "to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice," 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973(b). The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief barring the use of the present at-large voting system, and mandatory injunctive relief establishing an alternative, non-discriminatory system for future elections. The defendants are the Red Clay Board of Education and the individual members of the Board in their official capacities. Following a bench trial, the district court found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove a Sec. 2 violation, and therefore entered judgment for the defendants. See Jenkins v. Red Clay Consolidated School Dist. Bd. of Educ., 780 F.Supp. 221 (D.Del.1991). Plaintiffs' appeal followed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291.
In Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 106 S.Ct. 2752, 92 L.Ed.2d 25 (1986), the Supreme Court established three preconditions (the "Gingles factors") to a finding that the dilutive effects of a multimember district violated Sec. 2. We focus here predominately on the third Gingles factor, "that the white majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it--in the absence of special circumstances ...--usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate," id. at 50-51, 106 S.Ct. at 2766-67, because we have determined that it is dispositive of this appeal.
We conclude that the district court committed reversible error with respect to the third Gingles factor by relying on the potential for black voters to elect their representatives of choice with a plurality of the vote (as is permitted under the Red Clay voting scheme), when the record demonstrated that no Red Clay candidate had won with a mere plurality since 1981. The district court thus erred in failing to ground its analysis in the actual, rather than the potential, effect that the plurality voting scheme had on the ability of black Red Clay voters fully to participate in the political process and to elect their representatives of choice. Concluding also that the judgment cannot be affirmed on alternative grounds, we will reverse and remand for further proceedings, and suggest that the district court receive additional evidence on remand.
The Red Clay Consolidated School District was established by the Delaware State Board of Education in November of 1980, pursuant to the authority of 62 Del.Law Ch. 351. The creation of the district was approved by the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Evans v. Buchanan, 512 F.Supp. 839 (D.Del.1981), as part of its ongoing oversight of the desegregation of the Delaware public school system. Red Clay combines a portion of the city of Wilmington with certain of its suburbs in New Castle County. While Wilmington as a whole has a black majority population, the portion of Wilmington included in the Red Clay School District has a white majority, as do the suburban portions of the district. In sum, according to 1990 census figures, the Red Clay School District has a total population of 132,674, with a total black population of 19,252 or 14.51%. The total voting age population is 102,196, of whom 13,257, or 12.97%, are black.
The School Board has seven members, each of whom normally serves a term of five years. 1 Each Board Member must be a resident of a different nominating district (denoted as districts A-G), and must run for the seat associated with that nominating district. Elections are staggered so that only one or two seats are up for election each May. Beyond the residency requirement, the only requirement for becoming a candidate is to submit a petition signed by twenty eligible district voters. Elections are conducted on an at-large, non-partisan basis. Voters may vote at any polling place in the district, and they may vote for a single candidate running for each of the seats up for election in that year. There is no voter registration; any resident of the district who is at least eighteen years of age may vote. The candidate who receives at least a plurality of the votes for a particular seat is elected.
In 1981, when the first elections were conducted under the reformulated Red Clay School District scheme, elections were held for six of the seven School Board seats. 2 For the district B seat, a black candidate, Harlan Roberts, was elected over five white candidates. Two other black candidates, William Anderson from district A and Gregory Connor from district E, also sought seats on the Board, but were defeated. All other candidates were white.
In 1982, two seats were up for election. Two white candidates ran for the seat in district C, and the white incumbent ran unopposed for the seat in district G.
In 1983, a black and a white candidate vied for the seat in district A. Similarly, the seat from district D was contested by a black and a white candidate. Both of these elections were won by the white candidates.
In 1984, three white candidates ran for the seat in district D, and two white candidates ran for the seat in district E.
In 1985, incumbent black candidate Roberts was defeated by a white candidate for the seat in district B. Additionally, the incumbent white candidate ran unopposed for the seat in district G.
In 1986, a white candidate was appointed to fill the seat in district C. Three white candidates ran for the seat in district F.
In 1987, the only election was for the seat in district C, in which there were four white candidates.
In 1988, a black candidate ran against two white candidates for the seat in district A. The seat was won by one of the white candidates. Additionally, an incumbent white candidate ran unopposed for the seat in district D.
In 1989, two white candidates ran for the seat in district E, the sole seat up for election.
In 1990, two black candidates, Carol Scotton and Rita Shockley, ran against each other for the seat in district B. Scotton was elected. Two white candidates ran against each other for the seat in district G.
In 1991, a black and a white candidate ran for the seat in district C, with the black candidate, Ronald Greene, winning. Two white candidates ran for the seat in district F. The 1991 election occurred after the trial. Neither party attempted to reopen the record to introduce evidence about the election, but the district court took...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holloway v. City of Va. Beach
...in racial preferences, as "the Gingles standard presupposes the existence of crossover voting." Jenkins v. Red Clay Consol. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. , 4 F.3d 1103, 1123 (3d Cir. 1993).Here, Plaintiffs established that Hispanic, Black, and Asian voters tend to vote together for similar prefer......
-
Holloway v. City of Virginia Beach
...379 (4th Cir. 2020), as amended (July 27, 2020) (Wynn, J., dissenting) (collecting cases); see also Jenkins v. Red Clay Consol. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. , 4 F.3d 1103, 1116 n.6 (3d Cir. 1993) ("[I]t would be a highly unusual case in which a plaintiff successfully proved the existence of the ......
-
Cano v. Davis
...comparatively less important.") (quoting Citizens for a Better Gretna, 834 F.2d at 502); Jenkins v. Red Clay Consolidated School District Board of Education, 4 F.3d 1103, 1128-29 (3d Cir. 1993) (noting that "white versus white elections tend to be less probative," the court stated that "[i]......
-
Nipper v. Smith
...but still have failed to establish a violation of Sec. 2 under the totality of the circumstances." Jenkins v. Red Clay Consol. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 4 F.3d 1103, 1135 (3d Cir.1993). Nevertheless, the Supreme Court To be sure, some Sec. 2 plaintiffs may have easy cases, but although lack ......
-
Formulating Voting Rights Act Remedies to Address Current Conditions
...of evidence, including lay testimony or statistical analyses of voting patterns.” Jenkins v. Red Clay Consolidated School District et al., 4 F.3d 1103 (3d. Cir. 1993). Litigants can offer witnesses and evidence on this point in VRA litigation, but I am limited to secondary sources of 21. I ......