From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hughley v. Adams

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Feb 1, 1982
667 F.2d 25 (11th Cir. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-7068.

February 1, 1982.

Christopher Coates, Laughlin McDonald, Neil Bradley, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Bridges, Connell Snow, Richard T. Bridges, Alan W. Connell, Thomaston, Ga., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

Before THORNBERRY, FAY and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges.

Honorable Homer Thornberry, Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.


Plaintiffs filed this voting rights action on February 20, 1980, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the method for electing the Pike County (Georgia) Board of Education. Following a three-judge district court hearing and a district court trial, the parties agreed that the two laws governing the school board elections were unenforceable. The district court therefore requested redistricting proposals from the parties and, in its Order and Memorandum Opinion of September 23, 1981, adopted the plan submitted by the defendant school board. The district court, however, not having the benefit of the Supreme Court's decision in McDaniel v. Sanchez, 452 U.S. 130, 101 S.Ct. 2224, 68 L.Ed.2d 724 (1981), did not submit the plan to the Justice Department for preclearance under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Because McDaniel v. Sanchez clearly requires preclearance of the plan adopted by the district court, we remand the case in order to allow submission of the plan to the Justice Department. We also decline, for reasons of ripeness, to consider plaintiffs' remaining objections to the plan before it has received preclearance.

As in McDaniel v. Sanchez, the plan adopted by the district court was designed by the defendants and thus reflected the policy choices of the elected representatives of the people, regardless of the power of those representatives to enact the plan themselves. It is therefore a "legislative" plan, subject to the Voting Rights Act preclearance requirement.

REMANDED.


Summaries of

Hughley v. Adams

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Feb 1, 1982
667 F.2d 25 (11th Cir. 1982)
Case details for

Hughley v. Adams

Case Details

Full title:ROY HUGHLEY, REV. ROBERT L. CURTIS, JR., DAVID N. WOOD, ANTHONEY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: Feb 1, 1982

Citations

667 F.2d 25 (11th Cir. 1982)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Cobb County Bd. of Elections and Registr.

Presumably, this Court would be unable to submit its plan to the D.C. District Court. At the hearing,…

McMillan v. Escambia County, Fla.

Defendants, not surprisingly, now contend that it appears in McDaniel the Supreme Court has determined that…