CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections

2017 United States Supreme Court case

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 1, 2026
Entity authorityQ30642452 ↗
Source-derived summary

Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections, 580 U.S. 178 (2017), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court evaluated whether Virginia's legislature – the Virginia General Assembly – violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution by considering racial demographics when drawing the boundaries of twelve of the state's legislative districts.

The case involves the maps drawn up by the Republican-controlled state legislative bodies to try to maintain their majority within the state. The initial decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found the 2011 redistricting map to be racially gerrymandered. The state challenged to the Supreme Court, which found the District Court had misapplied a standard and remanded portions of the case while affirming other parts of the decision. On rehearing, the District Court again found the redistricting to be unconstitutional, and the state of Virginia declined to challenge the result. A second petition for the Supreme Court was initiated by the Virginia House of Delegates, appealing the new District Court ruling. The Supreme Court accepted the petition but summarily ruled that the House of Delegates did not have sufficient standing to challenge in lieu of the state itself.

Background

At the time of the case, Virginia had historically been a Republican-favored state but in the last few decades, has seen a shift towards the left. Republicans had managed to hold slim margins in the state legislature despite not having won a statewide election since 2009.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections” as 2017 United States Supreme Court case. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2017, 2011, 2009—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Bethune-Hill, Virginia and State can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as 2017 United States Supreme Court case. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 1, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q30642452. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2017, 2011 and 2009.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections primary sources, Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections archive and Bethune-Hill research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.