The state is challenging a lower court’s decision to invalidate its redistricting plan, arguing that it amounts to a federal takeover of its electoral system.
Officials in Louisiana have appealed to the Supreme Court to restore a congressional election map that was struck down by a federal district court. The lower court’s ruling prevented upcoming elections from being held under the map, which included a second black-majority district.
Louisiana contends that the federal district court exceeded its authority and warns of potential “election chaos” if the map is not reinstated promptly. The state emphasizes the urgency of the situation due to the strict election schedule that must be followed for this year’s elections to proceed.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on this matter in the coming week.
In an emergency application, the state’s attorneys have asked the Supreme Court to pause a ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. The panel found the state’s redistricting map unconstitutional, citing racial gerrymandering that disadvantaged non-black voters.
The controversy stems from a map approved by Louisiana’s Republican-led legislature, which established a second majority-black district out of the state’s six U.S. House districts. Currently, five of the six House seats are held by Republicans, as are both U.S. Senate seats.
The disputed map was created in response to a court order mandating the addition of a second black-majority district to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act’s Section 2, which prohibits discriminatory voting practices based on race.
The legislature’s 2022 redistricting plan, following the 2020 Census, designated five white-majority districts and one black-majority district, despite Louisiana’s significant black population.
A group of non-black voters challenged the new map, alleging racial segregation, and the district court sided with them, ordering the map’s revision by June 3. Failure to comply would result in the court imposing its own map. The state’s request for a stay of the injunction was denied by the court last week.
The outcome of this case before the Supreme Court could have national implications, given the narrow Republican majority in the U.S. House. Louisiana is home to prominent Republican lawmakers, Speaker Mike Johnson, and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise.
Justice Alito has instructed respondents to respond to the applications by May 13, and the state has urged the Supreme Court to stay the district court’s order by May 15 to ensure the timely execution of this year’s elections.
The state has invoked the Purcell principle, arguing against last-minute changes to state election laws by federal courts close to an election. They stress the need for a clear case, demonstrated harm, prompt legal action, and feasible changes without disruption.
The state’s application asserts that the district court’s injunction and proposed map revision would cause significant harm and confusion, emphasizing the need for a stay to prevent irreparable damage.
The plaintiff’s case does not have clear-cut merits, according to the application. There is a reasonable probability that the Supreme Court will have jurisdiction and may reverse the decision. The panel’s injunction is being challenged as the district court has disregarded the state’s map and election timeline, causing chaos. The Supreme Court is deliberating on a similar challenge in South Carolina regarding a congressional district redrawn on political, not racial, grounds. The decision in this case is expected by June.
Source link
