The Chronicle
RT Records in sight The men's tennis team will try to win its fourth consecutive ACC championship this weekend in Orlando. See page 17
Moneta named vice president for student affairs Appointment pends approval from Board of Trustees By STEVEN WRIGHT The Chronicle
Larry Moneta’s family must have given Durham the okay, because he’s coming to Duke. Following a year-long search, President Nan Keohane announced yesterday Moneta’s appointment as Duke’s next vice president for
student affairs.
Currently associate vice president for campus services at the University of Pennsylvania, Moneta accepted the offer last weekend when he and his wife, Judy, visited Duke. “With Larry, we are hoping and expecting that Student Affairs will be a more visible counsel in discussions about the role of students within the overall interest of the University,” Keohane said. “I found Larry interesting... because his record tells us that he has the strong combination of
valuing input and consultation, but at the same time knowing when a decision needs to be made.” Pending approval from the Board of Trustees, Moneta will assume his new post Aug. 1. Jim Clack, interim vice president for student affairs, has agreed to extend his tenure by an additional month. Moneta will officially replace former vice president for student affairs Janet Dickerson, who left last July for Princeton University. Keohane selected Moneta over University of Southern California Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs Cynthia Cherrey and Duke Vice Provost for Academics and Administrative Services Judith Ruderman. For the past three years, Moneta has led Penn’s impleSee MONETA on page 15
'•>
LARRY MONETA, Duke’s next vice presidents student affairs, will take office this summer and hopes to streamline many of the division’s services.
High court rules 12th District legal DSG rejects proposal to enjoin Union By AMBIKA KUMAR The Chronicle
After 10 years of legal wrangling, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 yesterday that the 1997 drawing of North Carolina’s 12th Congressional District was legal. The court reversed a three-judge panel’s opinion that legislators drew the district according to race—not politics. “The evidence taken together... does not show that racial considerations predominated in the drawing of District 12’s boundaries,” Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the majority opinion. The opinion states that the plaintiff needed to show that the state legislature could have met its same political objectives by drawing different lines while creating greater racial balance. Legal experts say the decision sets an important precedent. “The case stands for the principle that if districts are drawn primarily for political consideration, the fact that the district also has a substantial minority populationdoes not in and of itself violate the Constitution,” said Rick Hides, professor of law at New York University. He added that the decision makes further litigation likely once district lines are redrawn nationwide. This is the fourth time the Supreme Court has ruled on a case involving the 12th District. In 1993, the court ruled that ifthe legislature had drawn district lines according to race, it would violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. Three years later, the court ruled
By STEVEN WRIGHT The Chronicle
MAP
SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA GENERALASSEMBLY
that the legislature had indeed unnecessarily drawn district boundaries on the basis of race. In 1997, the legislature redrew the lines, but the new boundaries were rejected by a three-judge panel in a summary judgment. The Supreme Court reversed that decision, ruling that the judges should have held a hill trial. The
GREG PESSIN/THE CHRONICLE
judges held a trialbut again rejected the new district, resulting in the most recent appeal. In the dissenting opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas and three others did not take a stance on the lower court’s actual decision but said there was no proof that the its finding of racial predominance was “clearly erroneous.”
Duke Student Government wrapped up its year last night with a meeting full of debate and self-congratulations. The most controversial topic of the evening was a resolution expressing disapproval of the Duke University Union’s decision to reallocate space reserved a few hours each week for the DSG-sponsored attorney. Executive Vice President Drew Ensign, the junior who co-sponsored the resolution with classmate DSG Chief of Staff Jimmy Carter, proposed that DSG enjoin the Union from making any space reallocations. The measure failed, partly because the three DSG representatives to the Union Board— including Ensign—did not attend the meetings and were not aware of the changes. Some legislators contended that had representatives attended the meeting, then they could have prevented the Union from making such a reallocation. Ensign, however, argued that the Union should have informed DSG of any change. “The existence of representation does not mean that they shouldn’t have formally notified DSG,” he said. See DSG on page 16
South Square prepares to compete, page 4 � Utah loses census battle, page 6