1997 • $25.00 • 428 pp • paper
We are temporarily not accepting orders over our website while we move warehouses. Please call us at (919) 489-7486 for more information or to place an order.
The Supreme Court's 1993 decision, Shaw v. Reno, was a bellwether in equal protection litigation, marking a significant turn away from earlier voting rights jurisprudence. Did Shaw, and subsequent Supreme Court cases reaffirming its holding, signal the end of affirmative action in redistricting and the beginning of a wholesale re-examination of the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Peacock's book offers the most up-to-date, comprehensive treatment of voting rights issues in the 1990s.
Affirmative Action and Representation addresses this question and related issues with a view to assessing the implications of the Supreme Court's 1990s voting rights law. Balancing contributions from advocates and critics of affirmative action in voting rights, the book focuses on three issues: (1) the significance of Shaw and post-Shaw jurisprudence; (2) alternative models of representation that have become increasingly important as the Supreme Court has intensified its scrutiny of race-conscious districting; and (3) the applicability of the Voting Rights Act to judicial elections, an issue left unaffected by Shaw. A postscript examining the Supreme Court's 1996 decisions, Bush v. Vera and Shaw v. Hunt is also provided.
Affirmative Action and Representation includes contributions from some of the country's most prominent voting rights scholars, including Lani Guinier, Abigail Thernstrom, Bernard Grofman, Timothy G. O'Rourke, Samuel Issacharoff, Mark E. Rush, Richard L. Engstrom, Jason F. Kirksey, Edward Still, Ralph A. Rossum, Frederick G. Slabach, and the author.
“Peacock has drawn together a significant collection of short works, mostly appearing for the first time, from the disciplines of law and political science...a handy source of the latest practical and theoretical arguments on both sides of the affirmative action debate as it applies to voting rights.” — American Review of Politics