Supreme Court blocks North Dakota redistricting ruling that would gut key part of Voting Rights Act

Washington (AP) In a North Dakota redistricting case, the Supreme Court on Thursday overturned a lower court decision that would have invalidated a historic federal civil rights legislation for millions of people.

In an unsigned order, the justices said they are likely to consider a federal appeals court decision that would remove the most popular route for individuals and civil rights organizations to file a lawsuit under a significant clause of the Voting Rights Act, which has been in effect for 60 years.

The case might be determined by next summer, with arguments beginning as early as 2026.

Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito—three conservative justices—would have dismissed the appeal.

A second Louisiana congressional district with a majority of Black voters is the subject of a different redistricting dispute before the court. Despite hearing arguments in March, the justices made the unusual decision to schedule more arguments for their term, which starts in October. They have not yet specified the topics they would want to see covered.

The Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, whose reservations are 60 miles apart, claimed in the North Dakota lawsuit that the state’s 2021 parliamentary map violated the act by reducing their voting power and their capacity to choose their own representatives.

Three Native Americans, all Democrats, were elected to the Republican-supermajority Legislature last year after the lawsuit went to trial in 2023 and a federal judge later mandated the use of a map of the region, including the reservations.

However, a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided in a 2-1 decision in May that the law’s Section 2 only permits the Justice Department to file such claims.

In a 2023 case in Arkansas, the 8th Circuit likewise decided that private parties could not file a lawsuit under the same clause.

Richard Hasen, a law professor at UCLA, stated on the Election Law blog that private enforcement has been involved in over 90% of Section 2 cases.

The 8th Circuit’s conclusions go counter to decades of appellate court decisions upholding private parties’ Section 2 lawsuit rights.

When appeals courts across the nation reach divergent conclusions on the same legal matter, the Supreme Court frequently intervenes.

“We are glad that Native voters in North Dakota can still defend themselves against discrimination at the polls,” said Jamie Azure, chairman of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, in a statement. We are still fighting for our citizens’ rights. It is unacceptable that the North Dakota legislature’s adopted map illegally dilutes Native citizens’ votes.

Republican Secretary of State Michael Howe of North Dakota, who is mentioned in the complaint, stated that his office will continue to abide by election regulations established by the legislature or as instructed by any court rulings.

Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota are the seven states that are included in the 8th Circuit. Following the Arkansas ruling, Minnesota and other states took steps to strengthen voting rights by enacting state-level safeguards.

About The Author