Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al v. The State of Alabama, et al (PANEL)(LEAD)

Filing 243

STATEMENT OF JUDGE THOMPSON: I agree to the adoption of the 53 Order of 12/26/2012. Also, since the majority readopts its opinion and order of 8/2/2013 (doc. no. 174 ), I readopt my opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part (doc. no. 175 ). As to the majority's readoption of parts of its order and final judgment of 12/20/2013 (doc. nos. 203 and 205 ), I did not join in their conclusions that the plaintiffs failed to prove either their claim of vote dilution under § 2 or their claim of intentional discrimination in violation of § 2, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifteenth Amendment, and I do not join in those conclusions today. I also do not join in the majority's readoption of part of their findings of fact, for I did not join in them at the time they were entered. Finally, I do not readopt my dissent (including the factual findings set forth) (doc. no. 204 ), for I am obligated to reconsider fully the racial gerrymandering claim in light of the legal principles articulated by the Supreme Court. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/29/2015. (dmn, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
ALABAMA LEGISLATIVE
BLACK CAUCUS, et al.,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
v.
THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
et al.,
Defendants.
ALABAMA DEMOCRATIC
CONFERENCE, et al.,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
v.
THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
et al.,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:12cv961
(Three-Judge Court)
(WO)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:12cv1081
(Three-Judge Court)
(WO)

STATEMENT OF JUDGE THOMPSON
I agree to the adoption of the order of December
26,

2012

(doc.

no.

53).

Also,

since

the

majority

readopts its opinion and order of August 2, 2013 (doc.
no. 174), I readopt my opinion concurring in part and
dissenting in part (doc. no. 175).

As to the majority's readoption of parts of its
order and final judgment of December 20, 2013 (doc.
nos. 203 and 205), I did not join in their conclusions
that the plaintiffs failed to prove either their claim
of

vote

dilution

intentional

under

§ 2

discrimination

in

or

their

violation

claim

of

of

§ 2,

the

Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifteenth Amendment, and
I do not join in those conclusions today.

I also do

not join in the majority's readoption of part of their
findings of fact, for I did not join in them at the
time they were entered.
dissent

(including

the

Finally, I do not readopt my
factual

findings

set

forth)

(doc. no. 204), for I am obligated to reconsider fully
the racial gerrymandering claim in light of the legal
principles articulated by the Supreme Court.
DONE, this the 29th day of May, 2015.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson___
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE