October Term 2005 · Docket 05-204

Can Texas use race to draw a compact district if it is the main reason for the map?

Texas claims it used race to create a compact district. Challengers say the state used race to pack voters and dilute their power.

Official caption
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Paul Smith argued the Texas legislature acted only to maximize Republican representation.

    Ms. Perales argued Texas violated the Equal Protection Clause by using race excessively.

    Ms. Perales stated the state removed 100,000 Latinos from district 23.

    Ms. Perales claimed the state then crafted a razor-thin Latino majority district.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Texas redrew its congressional map in 2003. The state says it used race to create a compact district. Challengers argue the state used race to pack voters. The Court must decide if this use of race violates the Constitution.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 1, 2006.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Texas wants the Court to allow race as a main reason for drawing a compact district.

Challengers want the Court to strike down the map for using race to pack voters.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Texas argues that using race to create a compact district is permissible under the law.

Challengers argue that using race to create a thin majority district violates equal protection.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked if race can be a predominant motive for a compact district.

Justice Scalia asked if creating a majority-minority district is a racial reason regardless of compactness.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines how states can use race in redistricting. It determines whether compactness justifies racial considerations. It affects how states draw future congressional maps. It shapes the balance between racial representation and equal protection.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON