The U.S. appeals court determined that only the U.S. attorney general has the authority to enforce a policy mandating districts to guarantee minority representation. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other organizations in Arkansas have decided not to seek a review from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding a lower court ruling that prohibits private groups from suing under a crucial section of the federal Voting Rights Act. The ACLU’s Arkansas branch, which was involved in challenging Arkansas’s new state House districts, confirmed that they missed the deadline to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review the 2023 ruling by the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The appeals court panel found that only the U.S. attorney general can enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and that external groups cannot initiate lawsuits using this section of the law. The Arkansas Public Policy Panel and the Arkansas State Conference NAACP, who also challenged the state’s new House districts under the law, did not submit a petition by the deadline. Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act necessitates political maps to include districts where preferred candidates of minority populations can secure election victories. Lawsuits have historically been filed under this section to ensure adequate political representation for black and minority voters.
The ACLU spokesperson expressed disagreement with the Eighth Circuit’s ruling, stating that it goes against decades of legal precedent where federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have granted relief to private plaintiffs under Section 2. The spokesperson mentioned the possibility of exploring other avenues to challenge the Arkansas redistricting plan. The groups contended in their previous lawsuit that the plan denies black and minority groups the ability to elect representatives of their choice. While they are not pursuing a review of the decision, the ACLU asserted that they are committed to ensuring fair representation for all Arkansans.
The Eighth Circuit’s ruling is limited to federal courts within the district covering Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The groups contested the state House redistricting plan approved by Arkansas’s Board of Apportionment in 2021, with the ACLU challenging it later that year. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin viewed the decision not to petition the Supreme Court as a victory for the state, bringing an end to the challenge. Griffin emphasized the importance of elected officials making decisions regarding the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act rather than special interest groups.
The Eighth Circuit panel argued that while courts have acknowledged the private enforceability of Section 2, a closer examination revealed shaky grounds for this assumption. The panel maintained that decisions regarding the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act should be made by elected officials, not special interest groups. The U.S. Supreme Court’s directive to Alabama in 2023 to redraw its congressional map following a lawsuit under Section 2 underscores the significance of proper enforcement of the Act. The ACLU’s decision not to challenge in Arkansas aligns with the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ denial of Louisiana’s request for a hearing on the ability of individuals and external groups to sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The article includes insights from The Associated Press. Please rewrite this sentence.
Source link
