John Marshall Harlan II

“ In dissent I noted that a federal court order that a state election be held under a plan declared invalid under the State Constitution by the highest court of that State surely presented issues of far-reaching importance for the smooth functioning of our federal system, which were deserving of plenary consideration by this Court. I would have accelerated the appeal, and but for the action of this Court in denying the stay which was sought I would have granted the further application for such a stay that was made to me during the summer. ”

“ The appeal from the three-judge District Court is brought here under 28 U.S.C. § 1253 (1964 ed.) , and I do not believe this case, or a fortiori any of the other New York reapportionment cases presently before the Court, is moot. Surely if this Court now held that the District Court erred in ordering the election under Plan A, it has the power, for example, to enjoin the November 2 election and to order the District Court to arrange for yet another election and for other appropriate temporary reapportionment relief. ”

“ The very great difficulties implicit in affording any such relief at this late stage go to the question of its desirability, not to the mootness of the underlying action.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105) . ”