How Chief Justice Roberts used the 2000 Census to put his foot his door for Republican majorities at the expense of Democrats

Last Post: My Response to ChatGPT Gerrymandering History
Next Post: 3069 days

Donate to, Support or learn about the last lincoln republican. Click here: Weltyforcongress.com

I wrote a post about this in 2006. You will see that age has erased the links which explained its contents but fortunately I saw the date and enough information to ask ChatGPT a question which described how the GOP got black voters to help them add more Republcians to Congress as an aftereffect. Here is ChatGPT explanation of what happened. Be sure to scroll down the map of North Carolina’s black friendly but Democratic Party killing Congressional Districts.

MY QUESTION:

In about 2006, North Carolina redistricted its congressional districts in a way that helped both Republicans and African Americans elect people to Congress at the expense of the Democratic Party. Can you tell me a little bit about how that came about?

THE ANSWER:

What you’re thinking of is a real—and somewhat counterintuitive—episode in North Carolina politics where redistricting produced gains for Republicans and Black voters at the same time, while weakening the statewide Democratic Party’s overall seat share.

Here’s how that came about.

1. The legal and political backdrop

After the 2000 census, North Carolina had to redraw its congressional map. This process was shaped heavily by:

The Voting Rights Act of 1965
A series of court cases, including Shaw v. Reno, which limited bizarrely shaped majority-Black districts but still allowed race to be considered

The key tension:

The law encouraged creation of districts where Black voters could elect their preferred candidates
But courts also warned against using race too aggressively in drawing lines
2. “Packing” and its political effects

Mapmakers (Democrats controlled the legislature at the time) created or preserved majority-Black districts, especially:

The 1st District (held by G. K. Butterfield)
The 12th District (held by Mel Watt)

To make those districts reliably elect Black candidates, they concentrated Black voters into a small number of districts.

That had two big consequences:

A. Positive for Black representation
These districts became very safe seats for Black Democrats
Black voters had strong influence in electing candidates of their choice
B. Negative for Democrats statewide
By concentrating (or “packing”) reliable Democratic voters into a few districts,
surrounding districts became:
Whiter
More conservative
More competitive—or Republican-leaning
3. Why Republicans benefited

Even though Democrats drew the map, the outcome helped Republicans because:

Democratic voters (especially Black voters) were less evenly distributed
Republicans could win more districts by smaller margins
Democrats won fewer districts but by huge margins

This is a classic example of:

“Packing” (concentrating voters) vs.
“Cracking” (splitting voters across districts)

In this case, packing Black voters indirectly helped Republicans win more seats overall.

4. Why Democrats accepted it

This is the interesting strategic part.

Many Democrats supported this kind of map because:

They were committed (and legally required) to protect minority representation
Black voters were a core part of the Democratic coalition
Creating majority-Black districts was seen as:
Politically fair
Legally safer under the Voting Rights Act

But the tradeoff was real:

Stronger minority representation
Weaker overall Democratic seat share
5. The broader pattern

North Carolina wasn’t unique. Similar dynamics appeared across the South:

States like Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi
Majority-Black districts increased Black representation
But often helped Republicans win more total seats

This dynamic has been debated ever since:

Some argue it empowers minority voters
Others argue it reduces their influence statewide
6. Why this moment matters

The 2000s North Carolina maps became a key example in later debates about:

Racial gerrymandering vs. partisan gerrymandering
Whether minority representation should be concentrated or spread out
How to balance fair representation vs. overall partisan outcomes

These issues continued into later court fights, especially in the 2010s.

If you want, I can walk you through a before-and-after map breakdown showing exactly how the districts shifted numerically—it really makes the tradeoff much clearer.

OF COURSE I ASKED FOR A LINK TO THE MAP:

Look at the snake that is Congressional District 12

About the author

Harry is a ferociously good natured eccentric in Duluth Minnesota who detests traitors dressed up as Uncle Sam. You can find somewhat better edited writings of his at the Duluth Reader "contributors." page. The URL is:

https://duluthreader.com/contributors/h/84/284-harry-welty