This Article will look briefly at the historical background of the VRA and minority voting; at the actions of the North Carolina legislature; at the ensuing lawsuit; at the decision of the trial court; at the vacated decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court; and, finally, at the second of the two North Carolina Supreme Court decisions upholding the dual racial quotas—most recently, the case decided after remand from the Supreme Court for reconsideration in light of the decision in Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama. Still, in spite of the first reaction of the North Carolina Supreme Court to the remand, the Alabama decision may hold promise of an escape from the racial-gerrymandering, antidemocratic cul-de-sac in which we are currently imprisoned. That promise is enhanced by the recent federal decision in Harris v. McCrory, finding that the legislature’s racial gerrymander of two congressional districts violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Whether the North Carolina courts and ultimately the Supreme Court will eventually recognize the current racial gerrymander for what it is or will strike the political gerrymander remains an open question. My hope is that they will then apply strict scrutiny to the gerrymander and finally strike down the districting—but more about that later.
Finally, this Article makes some suggestions for reconceptualizing the law and following the deeper purposes of our democratic and egalitarian Constitution. The Constitution has evolved over time, approaching—but falling ever short of—the Declaration of Independence’s ideals of equality, liberty, and popular sovereignty.
