explaining that Baker means that in a suit challenging the constitutionality of a state statute, the attorney general does not possess exclusive authority to choose whether the state’s interests will be asserted on appeal and that another state official charged with the duty of enforcing a statute held unconstitutional could appeal the judgment even if the attorney general chose not to do so
How later courts described this case
- explaining that Baker means that in a suit challenging the constitutionality of a state statute, the attorney general does not possess exclusive authority to choose whether the state’s interests will be asserted on appeal and that another state official charged with the duty of enforcing a statute held unconstitutional could appeal the judgment even if the attorney general chose not to do so
- finding judges who had intervened as defendants had Article III standing as voters affected by the challenged judicial election scheme to pursue the case independently on appeal
- “Requiring plaintiffs affirmatively to establish that white voters’ rejection of minority-preferred candidates was motivated by racial animus would make racial bloc voting both difficult and, considering the additional analysis that would be needed, expensive to establish.”
- "[T]he 1982 amendments to Sec. 2 were intended to 'codify' the results test as employed in White and Whitcomb."
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WIENER, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. In so doing I join the dissent of Chief Judge Politz in the belief that we judge best when we judge least, particularly in controversial matters of high public interest to the several states. If forced to take a position on the merits of this, the second en banc consideration of the case, I would regrettably find it impossible to concur in the reasoning of Judge Higginbotham’s majority opinion or Judge Jones’ concurring opinion. For me those writings simply do not “hang together.” I would therefore reach the same conclusion as does Judge King in her dissent — and for most if not all of the same reasons.