ROANOKE TIMES 
                      Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times

DATE: Tuesday, December 10, 1996             TAG: 9612100099
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL   PAGE: A-4  EDITION: METRO 
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: Associated Press

RACE'S ROLE IN REDISTRICTING SCRUTINIZED SUPREME COURT WILL RULE ON THE GEORGIA CASE BY JULY

The racial politics of running for Congress in Georgia and for a local school board in Louisiana provided the backdrop Monday as the Supreme Court examined the use of race in redrawing election districts.

In separate argument sessions, the court appeared wary of redistricting efforts aimed at maximizing black candidates' success.

In the Georgia case, the Clinton administration and black voters are asking the court to strike down a congressional map that features one majority-black district so a plan with two can be put in place.

In the Louisiana case, a school board redistricting plan that includes no majority-black districts is under attack.

Rulings, expected by July, may clarify just how far the justices will let legislators and local officials nationwide go to preserve or enhance the voting clout of racial and ethnic minorities.

The court has frowned upon such efforts in a series of decisions since 1993, ruling that drawing districts mainly to boost minority voting power almost always amounts to unlawful racial gerrymandering.

At one point Monday, Justice Anthony Kennedy sardonically noted that a Justice Department effort to refashion Georgia's 11-district congressional map to provide two majority-black districts ``just so happens'' to split counties ``along white-black lines.''

A lower court opted instead for a plan with one majority-black district.

When Justice Department lawyer Seth Waxman said the court-drawn plan failed to respect the Georgia Legislature's desire for two majority-black congressional districts, several justices sounded dubious.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor noted that the three-judge federal court in Georgia concluded that the state Legislature had drawn such a plan only as a ``result of Justice Department coercion.''

At the federal government's urging after the 1990 census, Georgia had created a redistricting plan with three majority-black districts. But the Supreme Court struck it down last year.

A. Lee Parks, representing a group of white voters who support the court-imposed plan, noted that two black incumbents forced to seek re-election in majority-white districts were winners in last month's elections.

``The real world of this case is that both minority candidates won,'' he said. ``They found positions that would appeal to both black and white voters, and they won.''

In the Louisiana case, the court wrestled with the standard that Justice Department lawyers or federal courts must use when deciding whether proposed changes in district boundaries comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

One part of the law says a proposed change cannot win the required Justice Department approval if it has a discriminatory purpose or effect.

Another part of the law is even more stringent. It bans any voting practice that has a discriminatory effect - no matter what its purpose.

LENGTH: Medium:   62 lines
ILLUSTRATION: PHOTO:  AP. American Civil Liberties Union attorney Laughlin 
          McDonald talks with Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., Monday after a 
          news conference at the Supreme Court.