Is Gerrymandering Legal? | Shaw v. Reno

Is Gerrymandering Legal? | Shaw v. Reno

Assessment

Interactive Video

History, Social Studies

6th - 12th Grade

Hard

Created by

Quizizz Content

FREE Resource

The video discusses North Carolina's lack of African American representation in Congress despite a significant African American population. It covers the state's efforts to create majority African American districts, leading to accusations of racial gerrymandering. The case, Shaw v. Reno, reached the Supreme Court, which ruled against racial gerrymandering, emphasizing the importance of equal protection. The video highlights the ongoing issue of partisan gerrymandering and the need for reform.

Read more

7 questions

Show all answers

1.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What was the primary reason for creating a new district in North Carolina after the 1990 Census?

To ensure an African American representative was elected

To reduce the number of districts in the state

To comply with federal budget requirements

To increase the number of representatives in Congress

2.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What is gerrymandering?

Manipulating district boundaries to favor a group

A strategy to reduce election costs

A method to increase voter turnout

A process of fair districting

3.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

Who led the lawsuit against the state and federal government regarding North Carolina's District 12?

Janet Reno

Ruth Shaw

Elbridge Gerry

Reynolds Sims

4.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What was the Supreme Court's decision in the Shaw v. Reno case?

They ruled in favor of partisan gerrymandering

They dismissed the case

They upheld the districting plan

They sided with Shaw, ruling against racial gerrymandering

5.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What was one of the main arguments against racial gerrymandering in the Shaw v. Reno case?

It was a cost-effective way to draw districts

It was a traditional practice in American politics

It could lead to representatives focusing only on certain constituents

It ensured equal representation for all groups

6.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What did the dissenting justices argue in favor of racial gerrymandering?

It helped historically underrepresented groups gain power

It was unconstitutional under any circumstances

It was irrelevant to the Voting Rights Act

It was a form of partisan gerrymandering

7.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What ongoing issue related to gerrymandering is highlighted at the end of the video?

The persistence of partisan gerrymandering

The rise of voter suppression tactics

The increase in voter turnout

The elimination of all forms of gerrymandering