Jan 9, 2025 Story by: Editor
NEW ORLEANS – Attorneys representing Louisiana in a lawsuit challenging the state’s 2022 redistricting plans are questioning the constitutionality of a key provision of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). They argue that Section 2, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting, should no longer apply to Louisiana.
This case, Nairne v. Landry, could become a pivotal legal precedent affecting Black voting strength in states with similar disputes over legislative redistricting.
Arguments Before the 5th Circuit
On Tuesday, January 7, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case, where Black voters have claimed the latest legislative maps represent unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.
U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick previously ruled in February that the maps drawn by Louisiana lawmakers fail to provide Black voters with fair opportunities to elect their representatives. Her decision came after the 2023 elections, which resulted in a Republican supermajority in both legislative chambers.
Judge Dick’s ruling blocks elections in all legislative districts until the lawsuit is resolved. However, special elections for two vacant Louisiana Senate seats were allowed to proceed in February after an agreement by the plaintiffs.
State’s Defense
The state has appealed Dick’s decision, with Deputy Solicitor General Morgan Brungard arguing that Section 2 of the VRA is no longer applicable.
“Conditions that originally justified those measures no longer apply to Louisiana,” Brungard stated. “We ask the court to reverse and hold Section 2 unconstitutional as it applies to Louisiana.”
Brungard claimed Black voter turnout in the state is high enough that the provision is unnecessary.
Judicial Panel
The case is being overseen by three judges: James Dennis, appointed by President Bill Clinton; Catharina Haynes, appointed by President George W. Bush; and Irma Ramirez, appointed by President Joe Biden.
Broader Implications for the VRA
Conservative legal efforts to weaken the VRA have gained momentum in recent years. Nairne v. Landry is viewed as a potential test case for overturning Section 2.
Last year, 14 Republican attorneys general filed an amicus brief supporting Louisiana’s position. They cited a 2023 decision by the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, which limited enforcement of the VRA to the federal government, excluding individuals.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has intervened in the case, arguing that states cannot opt out of federally applicable statutes like the VRA. “For instance, states cannot claim exemption from the Americans with Disabilities Act based on their assertion of non-discrimination,” said Noah Bokat-Lindell, a DOJ civil rights attorney.
Alternative Protections Cited
Attorney General Liz Murrill stated that even if Section 2 is ruled unconstitutional, Black voters could rely on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
“These legal arguments are preserved so they might eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court,” Murrill said. “They are also being debated in other cases concerning the scope and application of Section 2 under current conditions.”
Impact of Judge Dick’s Decision
If upheld, Dick’s ruling would require lawmakers to redraw district boundaries. While the ruling did not specify how many majority-Black districts should be created, plaintiffs argue for adding six in the House and three in the Senate.
Currently, 28 of 105 House districts and 11 of 39 Senate districts have Black majorities.
State Rep. Edmond Jordan, D-Baton Rouge, announced plans to introduce a new redistricting proposal during the legislative session starting April 14.
Challenges to Standing
A key issue in the case is whether Judge Dick was correct to block the entire redistricting plan. State attorneys argue that plaintiffs should only have standing to contest districts where they reside.
It is unclear when the 5th Circuit panel will issue a decision on the state’s appeal. Source: WWNO
