## Facts

- Black citizens of Chilton County, Alabama, brought class actions challenging the countywide, at-large election systems used for the Chilton County Commission and the Chilton County Board of Education.
- Under the challenged systems, each body had five members elected at-large using numbered posts and a majority-vote requirement in party primaries.
- The 1980 census showed Chilton County’s population was 30,610, with approximately 11.86% Black residents.
- Both the commission and the board admitted their at-large election systems violated § 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
- The parties proposed a consent decree expanding each body to seven members and electing members through countywide cumulative voting (allowing voters to allocate multiple votes among candidates).
- Some members of the plaintiff class objected, arguing cumulative voting did not adequately remedy the § 2 violation and urging single-member districts instead.
- A magistrate, serving as special master, held hearings and recommended approval of the proposed settlement.

## Issues

1. Whether a consent decree adopting seven-member bodies elected through countywide cumulative voting is a fair, adequate, lawful, and sufficient remedy for the admitted § 2 violations, despite objections from some class members favoring single-member districts.

## Decision

- The court approved the consent decree and adopted the magistrate’s recommendations.
- The court held the cumulative-voting remedy, combined with expanding each body to seven members, was an adequate and lawful response to the admitted § 2 violations.
- The court rejected the argument that § 2 required a single-member district plan or a remedy guaranteeing proportional electoral outcomes.
- The court concluded that class-member objections did not bar approval where the settlement as a whole was fair, reasonable, and consistent with § 2.

## Legal Principles

- § 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits electoral practices that result in minority voters having less opportunity than others to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice; the focus is on results rather than intent.
- After a § 2 violation is established or admitted, the remedy must eliminate the discriminatory effects and provide minority voters a realistic opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, but § 2 does not guarantee proportional representation.
- Courts have broad equitable discretion to approve remedies for § 2 violations and are not limited to single-member districting when alternative electoral methods can provide an equal opportunity.
- In a class action, a court may approve a consent decree if it is fair, adequate, and reasonable and not unlawful or against public policy; objections are relevant but not controlling.

## Conclusion

The court approved a class-action settlement replacing unlawful at-large, numbered-post elections with an expanded seven-member structure elected by cumulative voting, finding the remedy lawful and sufficient under § 2 even though some class members preferred single-member districts.


Dillard v. Chilton Cnty. Bd. of Educ. & Chilton Cnty. Comm'n, 699 F. Supp. 870 (M.D. Ala. 1988)