July 28, 2024 Story by: Editor
Fourteen Republican attorneys general, including Nebraska’s Mike Hilgers, have contested a federal judge’s interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, following a ruling that nullified Louisiana’s legislative maps. They argue the ruling was unconstitutional.
Led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, the attorneys general presented their case through an amicus brief filed last week in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, concerning the case of Nairne v. Ardoin.
The brief stated: “States deserve fair notice regarding how to draft redistricting laws that comply with federal law. Yet under the District Court’s free-wheeling approach, members of the Louisiana Legislature could never guess ahead of time what facts might — in a court’s view — trigger a (Voting Rights Act) violation and thus might justify presumptively unconstitutional race-based districting.”
Jared Evans, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which represents Black Louisianians in redistricting cases, claimed the attorneys general are using this case as a test to weaken the Voting Rights Act. Evans argued that the focus is on Section 2 of the Act, which prevents laws that discriminate based on race or membership in a language minority group.
“They know that if Section 2 is upheld, many states will need to add additional minority Black districts across various political boundaries,” Evans said. “Every case brought under Section 2 is seen as a test to further weaken its jurisprudence.”
In February, U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick ruled that Louisiana’s current legislative maps do not allow Black voters a fair chance to elect their representatives, as required by the Voting Rights Act. She ordered the state to approve new districts but did not specify a timeline or the number of Black-majority districts needed. Plaintiffs suggested adding six districts to the Louisiana House and three to the Senate.
Since the ruling, Republicans have increased their efforts to challenge portions of the Voting Rights Act. Building on a 2023 ruling by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which stated that only the federal government could enforce the Act, Republican attorneys general are intervening in cases like Nairne v. Ardoin to argue that private citizens cannot file lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act.
Louisiana requested the 5th Circuit Court to hear their appeal based on this argument, but the court denied a full hearing. The case continues before a three-judge panel.
Evans criticized the 8th Circuit’s ruling, stating, “Section 2 has been upheld, and private groups have brought cases since the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized in 1984. This is just another attempt to weaken the Act.”
The brief from the 14 attorneys general also references a footnote in Judge Dick’s ruling about the subliminal message of voter suppression conveyed by a sheriff’s office and registrar of voters being housed on the same floor of a government building. The brief mocked this notion, stating, “The Voting Rights Act is concerned with the right to register, vote, and participate in politics — win or lose — not on whispers from parish buildings.”
Evans disagreed, citing the historical context of law enforcement’s treatment of minorities. “Having to register where law enforcement is housed is a form of voter suppression and intimidation,” he stated.
In addition to Alabama’s Steve Marshall, attorneys general from Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia joined the brief. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, a defendant in the case, did not sign the brief and declined to comment. Legislative leaders have also yet to take steps to redraw the state’s legislative maps. Source: Nebraska Examiner
