Gerrymandering by Race
Manipulating electoral district boundaries to dilute or concentrate the voting power of racial or ethnic groups.
Updated April 23, 2026
How It Works
Gerrymandering by race involves redrawing electoral district boundaries in a way that intentionally affects the political power of racial or ethnic groups. This manipulation can either dilute the voting strength of a minority group by spreading its members thinly across many districts ("cracking") or concentrate them into a single district ("packing") to reduce their influence in other districts. The goal is often to minimize the ability of a racial group to elect candidates of their choice or to influence election outcomes.
Why It Matters
This practice has significant implications for democratic fairness and representation. Gerrymandering by race can undermine the principle of equal representation by weakening the electoral influence of minority communities, which may lead to less diverse political bodies and policies that do not reflect the interests of all citizens. It also perpetuates systemic inequalities and can erode trust in the electoral process.
Gerrymandering by Race vs. Partisan Gerrymandering
While both involve manipulating district boundaries, racial gerrymandering specifically targets racial or ethnic groups, often violating civil rights laws like the Voting Rights Act in the United States. Partisan gerrymandering, on the other hand, seeks to advantage a political party regardless of racial considerations. However, these forms sometimes overlap, as racial demographics often correlate with party affiliation.
Real-World Examples
One notable case is Shaw v. Reno (1993) in the United States, where the Supreme Court addressed whether North Carolina’s oddly shaped congressional districts were an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The Court ruled that race cannot be the predominant factor in creating electoral districts unless there is a compelling justification.
Common Misconceptions
A common misconception is that all district boundary changes affecting racial groups are gerrymandering by race. In reality, districts may reflect demographic shifts naturally or be drawn to comply with laws ensuring minority representation. Another misunderstanding is that racial gerrymandering always benefits minority groups; often, it is used to diminish their electoral influence.
Example
In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shaw v. Reno that North Carolina's racially gerrymandered districts were unconstitutional because race was the predominant factor in drawing the boundaries.
Covered in