(a) Relevant factors. In determining whether a submitted redistricting plan has a prohibited purpose or effect the Attorney General, in addition to the factors described above, will consider the following factors (among others):

(1) The extent to which malapportioned districts deny or abridge the right to vote of minority citizens;

(2) The extent to which minority voting strength is reduced by the proposed redistricting;

(3) The extent to which minority concentrations are fragmented among different districts;

(4) The extent to which minorities are over concentrated in one or more districts;

(5) The extent to which available alternative plans satisfying the jurisdiction's legitimate governmental interests were considered;

(6) The extent to which the plan departs from objective redistricting criteria set by the submitting jurisdiction, ignores other relevant factors such as compactness and contiguity, or displays a configuration that inexplicably disregards available natural or artificial boundaries; and

(7) The extent to which the plan is inconsistent with the jurisdiction's stated redistricting standards.

(b) Discriminatory purpose. A jurisdiction's failure to adopt the maximum possible number of majority-minority districts may not be the sole basis for determining that a jurisdiction was motivated by a discriminatory purpose.

[Order No. 3262-2011, 76 FR 21249, Apr. 15, 2011]