Abstract
Abstract
This article analyzes the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Perry v. Perez in the context of competing precedents, surveys post-Perry redistricting cases, and considers Perry's implications for the future. Part II examines Perry in light of competing precedents. Part III analyzes cases that considered how Perry applies in other situations. Part IV discusses “expressions of state policy” considered by the courts in impasse and other situations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.