Rodriguez v. Pataki
Decision Date | 15 March 2004 |
Docket Number | No. 02 CIV. 618(RMB).,No. 02 CIV. 3239(RMB).,02 CIV. 618(RMB).,02 CIV. 3239(RMB). |
Citation | 308 F.Supp.2d 346 |
Parties | Eric RODRIGUEZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. George E. PATAKI et al., Defendants. Howard T. Allen et al., Plaintiffs, v. George E. Pataki et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Richard D. Emery, Emery, Celli, Cuti Brinckerhoff & Abasy, P.C., New York, NY, for Plaintiffs.
Joan P. Gibbs, Rivers, Mealy, Cransnow & Bradford, Brooklyn, NY, for Plaintiff-Intervenors.
Michael Carvin, Jones Day, Reavis & Progre, Washington, DC, for Bruno.
C. Daniel Cvell, Gravbard, Miller, New York, NY, for Silver.
Before WALKER, Chief Circuit Judge, KOELTL and BERMAN, District Judges.
These consolidated actions include constitutional and statutory challenges to the State Senate and congressional redistricting plans enacted by the New York State Legislature in April 2002(following the 2000 census) and precleared by the United States Department of Justice in June 2002.Seven of the eight counts in the Joint and Consolidated Amended Complaint, dated January 24, 2003("Complaint"), pertain to the 2002New York State Senate redistricting plan ("Senate Plan"), and one count pertains to New York's 2002 congressional redistricting plan ("Congressional Plan").Two of the eight counts raise constitutional challenges under the Fourteenth Amendment,U.S. Const amend. XIV, 1: a one-person, one-vote challenge to the Senate Plan as a whole and a racial gerrymandering challenge to Senate District("SD") 34.Six counts raise challenges under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965,79 Stat. 437, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973(b)(the "VRA"), including challenges by the lead plaintiffs to redistricting in the Bronx, Long Island, and the state as a whole, as well as challenges by plaintiffs-intervenors to SD 31 and Congressional District("CD") 17.
On November 6, 2003, this three-judge District Court concluded that the plaintiffs had raised no triable issues of material fact with respect to Counts I, II, IV, VI, and VIII of the Complaint and granted summary judgment to the defendants on those claims.We indicated that an opinion explaining the decision would follow.Following trial, the Court has concluded that the plaintiffs have failed also to establish the claims set forth in Counts III, V, and VII by a preponderance of the evidence.Our opinion with respect to those counts on which we granted summary judgment together with our findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to all counts are detailed below, but some of the overarching considerations that inform our decision are as follows:
First, New York's 2002 redistricting laws are well within the purview and political prerogative of the State Legislature.See, e.g., Miller v. Johnson,515 U.S. 900, 915, 115 S.Ct. 2475, 132 L.Ed.2d 762(1995)();see alsoGeorgia v. Ashcroft,539 U.S. 461, 123 S.Ct. 2498, 2511-12, 156 L.Ed.2d 428(2003);Md. Comm. for Fair Representation v. Tawes,377 U.S. 656, 676, 84 S.Ct. 1429, 12 L.Ed.2d 595(1964).
Second, the 2002 Senate Plan reflects traditional districting principles including: maintaining equality of population, preserving the "cores" of existing districts, preventing contests between incumbents, and complying with the requirements of the Voting Rights Act.SeeMarylanders for Fair Representation, Inc. v. Schaefer,849 F.Supp. 1022, 1056(D.Md.1994)(three-judge court);see generallyLarios v. Cox,300 F.Supp.2d 1320(N.D.Ga.2004)(three-judge court).
Third, the 2002 redistricting continues New York's check and balance in its bicameral Legislature.In the State Assembly, which has been dominated by Democrats since 1974, six seats were gained by Democrats in 2002 and the balance of Democratic to Republican assemblypersons changed from 97/53 to 103/47.In the State Senate, which has been dominated by Republicans since 1966, the balance of Republican to Democratic senators shifted from 36/25 to 38/24, including the postelection change in party affiliation (from Democratic to Republican) of one senator.
Fourth, the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Holloway v. City of Va. Beach
...circuit's precedent); Perez v. Abbott , 250 F. Supp. 3d 123 (W.D. Tex. 2017) (permitting minority aggregation); Rodriguez v. Pataki , 308 F. Supp. 2d 346, 405 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (identifying the circuit split but relying on Emison to consider the cohesion requirement of a Black-Hispanic coalit......
-
Texas v. United States
...2004, when Rep. Vo first won his seat. Texas also cites two district court cases that rely on primary cohesion, Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346, 421 (S.D.N.Y.2004); and Session v. Perry, 298 F.Supp.2d 451, 478 (E.D.Tex.2004), but these cases represent the minority view. Most courts t......
-
U.S.A v. Vill. Of Port Chester
... ... During his Hearing testimony, Nelson Rodriguez described the events surrounding his 1991 campaign for a seat on the School Board. According to Rodriguez, more than 40 Hispanic voters were turned ... See, e.g., ... Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346, 378 n. 38 (S.D.N.Y.2004) (three-judge panel) ( ... Valdespino, 168 F.3d at 851-53; ... Negron v. City of Miami Beach, 113 ... ...
-
U.S. v. Euclid City School Bd.
...Indeed, the United States' own expert recently testified to this effect in another action. Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346, 401 (S.D.N.Y.2004) (three-judge panel) ("Dr. Handley's testimony supports the theory that black turnout will increase if they can elect candidates of choice.");......
-
Where to draw the line? Judicial review of political gerrymanders.
...upstate, overwhelmingly white Republican districts and overpopulated downstate Democratic districts. Rodriguez v. Pataki, 308 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2004), appeal docketed, No. 04-218 (U.S. Aug. 17, 2004). (6) 376 U.S. 1 (1964). (7) 509 U.S. 630 (1993). (8) 515 U.S. 900 (1995). (9) 478 U......