Private Plaintiffs Restricted from Suing Under Voting Rights Act, Appeals Court Rules

22

Private Plaintiffs Restricted from Suing Under Voting Rights Act, Appeals Court Rules

On Monday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, headquartered in St. Louis, issued a significant ruling impacting the federal Voting Rights Act. The court, in a 2-1 decision, declared that private parties and organizations, including the NAACP, lack the authority to initiate lawsuits under a crucial portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. This ruling is seen as a potential setback for voting rights, potentially diminishing the protections established by the historic legislation.

The court, with Judges David R. Stras and Raymond W. Gruender forming the majority, concluded that the enforcement of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which targets discriminatory voting practices such as racial gerrymandering, is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. attorney general. This section was the cornerstone of the recent decision. The majority opinion, written by Judge Stras, a Donald Trump appointee, and supported by Judge Gruender, a George W. Bush appointee, highlighted the absence of explicit language in the Voting Rights Act allowing private legal action, unlike in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

This verdict upholds an earlier decision by a lower court to reject a lawsuit filed by the Arkansas State Conference NAACP and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel. The case was initially dismissed after the court gave U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland a five-day window to join the lawsuit, an opportunity he did not take. Responses from both the NAACP and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel were not available at the time of reporting.

Chief Judge Lavenski R. Smith, another George W. Bush appointee, presented a contrasting view in his dissent. He emphasized that both the Supreme Court and various federal courts have historically entertained cases brought by private entities under Section 2. Judge Smith advocated adherence to this precedent, suggesting that the right to legal recourse should not be contingent solely on governmental intervention.

The impact of this decision is confined to the jurisdictions within the 8th Circuit, encompassing Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. It emerges amidst a backdrop of ongoing legal challenges by private groups against political districting maps nationwide.

The Justice Department has not issued any statement regarding this ruling.

This report was compiled with contributions from Cassidy in Atlanta and Mark Sherman in Washington, D.C., and is a part of the Big Big News coverage, supported by the Jonathan Logan Family Foundation. The Associated Press, which maintains full editorial control over its content, is spearheading this democracy initiative.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Voting Rights Act Ruling

More about Voting Rights Act Ruling

• Voting Rights Act Overview
• 8th Circuit Court of Appeals
• U.S. Attorney General’s Role
• Legal Precedents in Voting Rights
• NAACP’s Involvement in Voting Rights Cases
• Impact of Judicial Decisions on Civil Rights
• Federal Appeals Court Systems
• Analysis of the 1965 Voting Rights Act
• History of Racial Gerrymandering Cases
• Discussion on Private Lawsuits in Civil Rights Legislation