5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 38 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Karcher v. Daggett.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Karcher v. Daggett Anchor | green | “making districts compact, respecting municipal boundaries, preserving the cores of prior districts, and avoiding contests between incumbent representatives.” | 11 |
| 2 | Shaw v. Reno | green | “a reapportionment plan would not be narrowly tailored to the goal of avoiding retrogression if the state went beyond what was reasonably necessary to avoid retrogression.” | 9 |
| 3 | Karcher v. Daggett | green | “any number of consistently applied legislative policies might justify some variance, including, for instance, making districts compact, respecting municipal boundaries, preserving the cores of prior districts, and avoiding contests between incumbent representatives.” | 7 |
| 4 | Growe v. Emison | green | “there neither has been a wrong nor can be a remedy.” | 7 |
| 5 | Nipper v. Smith | green | “the absence of an available remedy is not only relevant at the remedial stage of the litigation, but also precludes, under the totality of the circumstances inquiry, a finding of liability.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.