Otis Wilson, a retired school bus driver, took matters into his own hands when discussions with the St. Francisville council and mayor failed to yield results regarding the lack of Black representation. He, along with a group of Black voters, initiated a lawsuit in 1992 against the small Louisiana town. Their challenge highlighted a significant issue: the at-large electoral system often dilutes the voting power of minority groups, a concern recognized by courts over the years.
Wilson’s lawsuit pushed St. Francisville to acknowledge that their election practices violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, leading the town to implement a new system of district-based elections. “If you didn’t go further, it just wouldn’t happen,” Wilson reflected on the legal pressures that led to the change.
However, the journey to ensure fair electoral representation is now facing a critical hurdle. A recent legal argument gaining traction in several states asserts that private citizens and groups no longer have the standing to sue under Section 2. Only the head of the Justice Department, they argue, should have the authority to file such lawsuits.
This emerging interpretation is at the forefront of a North Dakota redistricting case involving two tribal nations that are awaiting a Supreme Court review. A federal appeals court ruled against the Native American voters, and now the case could potentially set a precedent affecting many voters across the country.
As the Supreme Court prepares to take up this issue, many supporters of the Voting Rights Act fear the implications of a ruling that could strip away the ability of individuals to seek justice for electoral discrimination. “I think it’s going to be real terrible,” Wilson warned about the potential loss of the right to sue. “It’s just going to be disastrous because if we can’t do that, well, we just have no chance of fairness.”
Since the Voting Rights Act was enacted 60 years ago, an overwhelming majority of Section 2 lawsuits have been initiated by private individuals rather than the Justice Department. Estimates suggest that private plaintiffs have represented nearly 92% of all Section 2 cases brought since the law’s passage, emphasizing the crucial role these individuals play in upholding voting rights.
Ellen Katz, in a recent publication, highlighted that over 96% of Section 2 claims since 1982 have involved private plaintiffs, with private individuals serving as sole litigants in nearly 87% of cases. This data underscores the vital position that individual citizens occupy in enforcing their voting rights.
Morgan Kousser, a historian of the Voting Rights Act, estimated that more than 1,800 Section 2 lawsuits have occurred since 1965, with private individuals leading 92% of those cases. “Certainly counting the settlements as well and looking at how many of them are the result of private lawsuits makes clearer what the stakes are in destroying the private right of action,” Kousser noted.
The current legal landscape is precarious, especially as the conservative-leaning 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against the private right of action under Section 2. A backdrop of shifting political tides raises concerns that the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act may depend on who holds power at the executive level.
Legal experts like Franita Tolson warn that if the Supreme Court endorses the argument against private citizens’ standing to sue, it could have a catastrophic domino effect on voting rights protections. “If there is no private right of action under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act is basically dead,” Tolson stated. This sentiment highlights the risk that the protections enacted decades ago could be dismantled, leaving citizens vulnerable once again.
The Senate Judiciary Committee had emphasized the significance of a private right of action as intended by Congress during the 1982 amendments to the Voting Rights Act.
In a recent follow-up ruling, an 8th Circuit panel decided that private individuals in its jurisdiction also lack the right to sue based on Section 208 protections, which relate to voters with disabilities or limited language proficiency. This decision is anticipated to be appealed, further highlighting the contentious atmosphere surrounding voting rights litigation.
In response to these mounting challenges, members of Congress have reintroduced the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. This proposed legislation seeks to reassert the right of individuals to bring lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act but faces a grim reception given the current political dynamics in Washington.
The plight of Native American voters and Black voters remains urgent as they await clarity from the courts. Jamie Azure, chair of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, articulated the fundamental desire for proper representation that motivates their legal challenges against new redistricting maps in North Dakota.
Azure expressed steadfast resolve despite the uncertainty ahead, recognizing the historic struggles of civil rights advocates that have paved the way for their current efforts. “Who would have ever thought that as a rez kid growing up that I would be one of the figureheads leading a charge going to the Supreme Court? It’s very surreal,” he reflected.
Evan Milligan, a lead plaintiff in a related Alabama voting rights case, shared his insights about the strategic approach taken by state officials arguing against private rights of action. He likened it to adjusting strategies in a football game, emphasizing the need to confront unfavorable legal precedents head-on.
As the legal battle continues, community leaders like Azure remain hopeful that their actions will inspire belief in the power of voting. “The people elected into power should not be able to rig the systems to exclude certain types of voters from having an impact,” he asserted, embodying the spirit of resilience that defines the ongoing fight for voting rights across America.
The potential outcomes of the Supreme Court’s deliberations promise to shape the future of the Voting Rights Act significantly. Both Native American and Black voters are closely watching this legal landscape and continue to advocate for their right to be heard at the ballot box as they seek justice and representation.
image source from：npr
