Ezell Armour v. The State of Ohio , 925 F.2d 987 ( 1991 )

KENNEDY, Circuit Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree with Judge Merritt that the constitutional claim must be heard by a three judge court. However, I would address the merits of the Section 2 Voting Rights Act claim, 42 U.S.C. § 1973. When a plaintiff asserts both a constitutional claim and a statutory claim that is within the jurisdiction of a single district judge, that judge may resolve the statutory claim. Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 543-44, 94 S.Ct. 1372, 1382-83, 39 L.Ed.2d 577 (1974). The district judge has passed on the statutory claim which she had jurisdiction to consider. I express no opinion at this time as to the correctness of that decision.