In the case of Shaw v. Reno (1993) , the Supreme Court ruled that
A) majority-minority districts were not a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment.
B) majority-minority districts were unconstitutional.
C) minority-dominated congressional districts were a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
D) minority-dominated congressional districts were not a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
E) redrawing voting district lines from time to time is constitutional.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q20: The Reapportionment Act of 1929
A) fixed the
Q21: The process of adjusting the number of
Q22: The process of redrawing congressional district maps
Q23: Reapportionment of each state's delegation to the
Q24: A majority-minority district is
A) a congressional district
Q26: Majority-minority congressional districts may be constitutional if
A)
Q27: A representative who substitutes his or her
Q28: Term limits
A) are yet to be passed
Q29: On average, incumbency re-election rates since World
Q30: The greatest advantage incumbents hold is
A) franking
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents