An appeals court has struck down a key path for enforcing the Voting Rights Act

[brooklynite]

Source: NPR

Private individuals and groups, who did not represent the U.S. government, have for decades brought the majority of Section 2 cases to court. Those cases have challenged the redrawing of voting maps and other steps in the elections process with claims that the voting power of people of color has been minimized.

U.S. District Judge Lee Rudofsky, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, ruled in February 2022, however, that only the head of the Justice Department, the U.S. attorney general, can bring Section 2 lawsuits and dismissed an Arkansas redistricting case brought by advocacy groups representing Black voters in the state.

On Monday, that lower court ruling was upheld in a 2-1 vote by a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"For much of the last half-century, courts have assumed that [Section 2] is privately enforceable. A deeper look has revealed that this assumption rests on flimsy footing," wrote Circuit Judge David Stras, a Trump appointee, in the majority opinion joined by Judge Raymond Gruender, an appointee of former President George W. Bush.

Read more: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/20/1152732216/voting-rights-act-supreme-court-section-2-private-right-of-action

[ificandream]

1. The story says further down that it could be appealed to a State Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.

So there's a little hope there.

[FBaggins]

4. Not quite true. A state appellate court can't review the decision

It could be appealed to the full ('en banc') 8th circuit... but there's only one democratic appointee on that court.

And SCOTUS hasn't been all that friendly on VRA cases of late.

Additionally - a loss at the SCOTUS level would mean that the decision now applied to the entire country - while currently it only impacts about 7% of the population. It might be a better idea to let sleeping dogs lie.

[Lonestarblue]

2. Republicans doing their best to take away voting rights..

[ffr]

3. More FG (TFG) anti-Democratic bullshit we have to deal with in our lifetimes

But her emails and soon to be Biden's 'insert excuse here.' I get it.

[Marthe48]

5. Can this decision be used to fight

the anti-women abortion bans, such as in tx. that allow anyone to bring a law suit against someone suspected of having an abortion, or aiding someone in getting an abortion?

I'm not a lawyer. It seems like this ruling bars 3rd parties from bringing a suit, and maybe that ruling can set precedent for stopping 3rd parties from bringing other kinds of suits.

Just an idea from a tired mind, :/

[FBaggins]

6. Unfortunately... no

It isn’t a ruling saying that individuals can never bring lawsuits. It’s merely that the specific law did not create a cause of action for them. The TX law explicitly did.

And, of course, TX isn’t in the 8th circuit.

[Marthe48]

7. Thank you for the insight

I hope voters' rights can be restored, much sooner than later.

[Historic NY]

8. Then DOJ needs to get off it ass then