US court will not revisit ruling limiting voting rights lawsuits
Send a link to a friend
[January 31, 2024]
By Nate Raymond
(Reuters) -Civil rights activists on Tuesday failed to convince a
federal appeals court to reconsider a ruling that could sharply curtail
lawsuits enforcing a landmark voting rights law's protections against
racial discrimination.
The full 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request by the
Arkansas Public Policy Panel and the Arkansas State Conference NAACP to
reconsider a 2-1 ruling by a panel of judges holding that only the
government and not private plaintiffs can pursue cases enforcing Section
2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The panel's November decision marked the first time a federal appeals
court had reached such a conclusion. The vast majority of Voting Rights
Act lawsuits for decades have been filed by private parties, not the
U.S. Department of Justice.
The ruling came in a lawsuit challenging a redistricting plan for the
Arkansas State House of Representatives that the two groups alleged
undermined the voting power of Black people in the Republican-led state.
The plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, have
called the November decision "radical." It applies to seven states
within the 8th Circuit's jurisdiction, Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota,
Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.
"That it chose not to rehear the case ignores the gravity of what's at
stake — generations of precedent protecting voters and in turn our
democracy," Sophia Lin Lakin, a lawyer with the ACLU who argued the
appeal, said in a statement.
The plaintiffs said they were "exploring next legal steps." They could
now try to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, where two
members of the court's 6-3 conservative majority, Neil Gorsuch and
Clarence Thomas, have raised the question of whether private litigants
do have a right to sue.
[to top of second column]
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/45c99/45c998af447d44fa93965863a53dfee1c79e6e83" alt=""
A person casts his ballot for the upcoming presidential election
during early voting in Sumter, South Carolina, U.S., October 9,
2020. REUTERS/Micah Green
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7927e/7927e334bd6ec7989dc511ecb762f0461eb5834b" alt=""
In 2022, U.S. District Judge Lee Rudofsky, an Arkansas federal judge
appointed by former Republican President Donald Trump, held that
only the U.S. attorney general is empowered to file lawsuits under
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
That provision prohibits voting rules that are racially
discriminatory.
In November's 2-1 opinion authored by U.S. Circuit Judge David Stras,
another Trump appointee, the 8th Circuit held that the law does not
lay out a "private right of action," even though courts including
the Supreme Court have taken on such cases for decades.
Three judges dissented from Thursday's decision to not have the full
8th Circuit rehear the case, including U.S. Circuit Judge Steven
Colloton, an appointee of Republican former President George W.
Bush, who called the November ruling "flawed."
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and
David Gregorio)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.]This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/951f2/951f2680ca01ff27be71e8b8561e1029021fca7b" alt="" |