United States v. Garner, Civ. A. No. 17030.
Decision Date | 27 October 1972 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 17030. |
Citation | 349 F. Supp. 1054 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. J. R. GARNER, Municipal Superintendent of Jonesboro, et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia |
David L. Norman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Walter Gorman, Jerry E. Keith, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., John W. Stokes, Jr., U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.
Hutcheson, Kilpatrick, Watson, Crumbley & Brown, Jonesboro, Ga., for defendants.
Before BELL, Circuit Judge, and EDENFIELD* and FREEMAN, District Judges.
The parties, by the undersigned attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree that:
1. This action is brought by the Attorney General on behalf of the United States pursuant to Section 5 and Section 12(d) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973c and 1973j(d), and 28 U.S.C. § 2201.
2. This Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345 and Section 12(f) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973j(f).
3. Jonesboro is a municipal corporation of the State of Georgia and is organized and existing under the laws of that state.
4. Defendant J. R. Garner is the Municipal Superintendent of Jonesboro, Georgia, and as such, is vested by Sections 34A-301 and 34A-302 of the Georgia Municipal Election Code with the power and duty of conducting municipal elections and certifying the results thereof.
5. Defendant City Council of Jonesboro, Georgia, is the governing authority of Jonesboro and is vested by Section 34A-201 of the Georgia Municipal Election Code with the power and duty of providing funds and exercising supervisory control over the conduct of municipal elections.
6. The provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c, apply to the City of Jonesboro, Georgia.
7. The City of Jonesboro, Georgia, through its attorney, on October 14, 1971, submitted changes in its election procedures to the Attorney General of the United States pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The submission was completed December 7, 1971, and included the provisions of Georgia Laws 1971, No. 323 and Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Jonesboro which require:
8. The practice and procedure in Jonesboro prior to the submitted change cited in paragraph 7, above, and in effect on November 1, 1964, was for all candidates for City Council to run at large with no post requirement and with the candidates receiving the greatest number of votes being elected.
9. On December 4, 1971, the defendant conducted a municipal election in which the changes listed in paragraph 7 were implemented, without having first received a favorable determination from the Attorney General or the District Court for the District of Columbia under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Defendants caused the election to be held in such a manner that candidates for City Council were required to qualify and run for numbered posts, and candidates for City Council were required to receive a majority of the votes cast for their respective offices in order to be elected.
10. On February 4, 1972, the Attorney General interposed an objection to the changes enumerated in paragraph 7, which were submitted to him pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Now, therefore, a court of three judges having been convened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 2201 and 2284 and Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c, and with hearing on the merits and after considering the stipulation, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
US v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF SHEFFIELD, ALA.
...of Elections, 393 U.S. 544, 89 S.Ct. 817, 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1969) (see Code of Va. Tit. 24.1, §§ 43-46, Cum.Sup. 1976);1 United States v. Garner, 349 F.Supp. 1054 (N.D.Ga.1972) (see Ga. Code Ann. § 34A-502); and Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130, 96 S.Ct. 1357, 47 L.Ed.2d 629 (1976) (see La.R......
-
United States v. County Comm., Hale County, Alabama, Civ. A. No. 76-403-P.
...conceded that designation of a state is tantamount to designation of all political subdivisions within that state. In U. S. v. Garner, 349 F.Supp. 1054 (N.D.Ga.1972), a three-judge district court held that where the City of Jonesboro had failed to timely secure favorable determination of a ......
-
The Implementation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act: A Retrospective on the Role of Courts
...District of Columbia) under Richmond and Beer to raise objections to plans it deems discriminatory. '"See, for example, U.S. v. Garner 349 F.Supp. 1054 (N.D. Ga. 1972) which challenged the refusal of Jonesboro, Georgia, to submit its change from plurality to majority vote requirement for mu......
-
The Implementation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act: A Retrospective on the Role of Courts
...District of Columbia) under Richmond and Beer to raise objections to plans it deems discriminatory. '"See, for example, U.S. v. Garner 349 F.Supp. 1054 (N.D. Ga. 1972) which challenged the refusal of Jonesboro, Georgia, to submit its change from plurality to majority vote requirement for mu......