Answer :
Final answer:
The ruling in Shaw v. Reno (1993) is significant as it established that racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional, prohibiting the drawing of electoral district lines predominantly based on race. This ruling reinforces the principle of equal protection under the law. As a result, states must ensure that their district maps do not unfairly diminish the voting power of specific racial groups.
Explanation:
Shaw v. Reno (1993) Significance
The Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v. Reno (1993) is significant because it declared that racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional. The Court's ruling specifically stated that race cannot be a predominant factor when drawing electoral district lines, which was a key finding in cases related to redistricting. This legal precedent aimed to protect the one-person, one-vote principle and ensure fairness in electoral representation.
In this case, the Court ruled against North Carolina's congressional district map, which was designed to increase the representation of Black voters. The Supreme Court found that the map was drawn primarily based on race, which violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. Therefore, while not all forms of gerrymandering are considered unconstitutional, the Shaw v. Reno ruling has established that when districts are drawn with a predominant racial motivation, they infringe upon constitutional protections.
Learn more about gerrymandering here:
https://brainly.com/question/38414715