Cummings, : "Minor deviations from mathematical equality among state legislative districts," such as a deviation of 7.83%, are not automatically unconstitutional but rather allowable where there are legitimate State interests. (Connecticut). Karcher v. Daggett, : The "equal representation" standard of Art. I, § 2, requires a "good faith" effort to ensure congressional districts be apportioned to achieve population equality. No such good faith was used for a ~1% deviation which is therefore unconstitutional. (New Jersey). Evenwel v. Abbott, District drawn using total population ('one person, one vote') are valid even when the result is wide deviation among voting population (~40%). Ruling withheld as to whether states may alternatively draw district maps using eligible voters (rather than total population). (Texas). Subsequent Cases Regarding Racial Composition: City of Mobile v. Bolden, A municipal electoral system is constitutional if it does not have a discriminatory purpose, even if it has a discriminatory effect. (Alabama) Thornburg v. Gingles, : Three preconditions required to find a redistricting plan violates VRA §2[a]: (1) the minority group is "sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district," (2) is "politically cohesive" and (3) the "majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it [to] usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate." (North Carolina). Shaw v. Reno, : Attempt to create an additional majority-minority Congressional district challenged and held invalid because Redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause. (North Carolina). Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995): Attempt to create an additional majority-minority Congressional district challenged held invalid because it required the creation of a "geographic monstrosity" thereby violating Equal Protection of the majority, Justice Department "maximization" policy not enough of a compelling governmental interest (Georgia). Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U.S. 461 (2003): The District Court failed to consider all the relevant factors in evaluating 1997 State Senate districting plan - remanded for additional scrutiny (Georgia). Bartlett v. Strickland, : "Cross-over" voters (members of a majority who tend to vote for the preferred candidate of the minority) should not be attributed to the minority group when calculating whether the minority constitutes a numerical majority of the voting-age population (relative to Gingles 1st criteria). (North Carolina). Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, : Racial gerrymandering claims must be considered district-by-district, rather than by looking at the state as an undifferentiated whole. (Alabama). References Further