logo
Federal appeals court deals major blow to Voting Rights Act

Federal appeals court deals major blow to Voting Rights Act

CNN14-05-2025
A federal appeals court on Wednesday shut down the ability of private individuals to bring Voting Rights Act lawsuits challenging election policies that allegedly discriminate based on race in several states, a major blow to the civil rights law that has long been under conservative attack.
The ruling, which leaves enforcement of the VRA's key provision to the US attorney general, comes as the Trump Justice Department is gutting its civil rights division and pivoting away from the traditional voting rights work. The DOJ, for instance, dropped major lawsuits previously brought against Texas and Georgia.
The new ruling from the 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals covers the seven midwestern states covered in the St. Louis-based Circuit. The opinion means that in those states, only the Justice Department can bring lawsuits enforcing a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, which was passed by Congress in 1965 to address racial discrimination in election policies.
The 2-1 ruling from the 8th Circuit said that a separate civil rights law, known as Section 1983, did not give private individuals the right to bring VRA cases. That question had been left unanswered in a previous ruling from the circuit that said the VRA itself conferred no private right of action.
Those rulings cut against decades of cases successfully brought by individual voters to challenge election policies that violate the VRA by discriminating based on race. Several of the cases traveled up to the Supreme Court and produced rulings affirming the lower court decisions in the voters' favor, supporting the long-term understanding that the VRA gave private individuals ability to enforce the law with lawsuits.
While some conservative justices have questioned whether such private lawsuits could be brought under the VRA, the high court has never addressed the question directly.
The 8th Circuit's Wednesday opinion, written by George W. Bush-appointee Raymond Gruender and joined by Donald Trump appointee Jonathan Kobes, concluded that Congress had not 'unambiguously' conferred a private right of action in the VRA text, while asserting that it needed to do so under Supreme Court precedent.
A dissent from 8th Circuit Chief Judge Steve Colloton, a George W. Bush appointee, pushed back on that reasoning.
'Since 1982, private plaintiffs have brought more than 400 actions based on §2 that have resulted in judicial decisions. The majority concludes that all of those cases should have been dismissed because §2 of the Voting Rights Act does not confer a voting right,' Colloton wrote.
The new ruling stems from a lawsuit alleging that North Dakota discriminated against Native Americans in its state legislative redistricting plan.
'If left intact, this radical decision will hobble the most important anti-discrimination voting law by leaving its enforcement to government attorneys whose ranks are currently being depleted,' Mark Graber, senior director for redistricting at Campaign Legal Center, which is representing the Native Americans, said in a statement. 'The immediate victims of today's decision are North Dakota's Native American voters, who a trial court found were subjected to a map that discriminated against them on account of race.'
North Dakota's Secretary of State office, which was defending the maps, did not respond to CNN's inquiry.
If they seek to appeal the ruling, the Native American voters could seek a review by the full 8th Circuit – a court made up of almost entirely of GOP appointees – or they could take it straight to the Supreme Court, and its 6-3 conservative majority.
The latter path risks the gamble that the conservative majority would adopt the conclusions of the 8th Circuit panel, which would end nationwide privately brought lawsuits under the VRA's relevant provision and leave that provision's enforcement to the US attorney general alone.
Meanwhile, there has been a mass exodus under the second Trump administration of career officials in the DOJ Civil Rights Division, which houses the department's voting section, and the Department has been backing out of longstanding voting rights cases.
In 2013, the Supreme Court's conservative majority gutted a separate section of the VRA that required states with a history of racial discrimination in voting practices to get federal approval for changes in election policy.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

DHS to cut 75% of staff in its intelligence office amid heightened threat environment
DHS to cut 75% of staff in its intelligence office amid heightened threat environment

CBS News

time18 minutes ago

  • CBS News

DHS to cut 75% of staff in its intelligence office amid heightened threat environment

The Department of Homeland Security's intelligence arm plans to cut nearly three-quarters of its full-time employees, shaving its Office of Intelligence & Analysis down from about 1,000 staff to just 275, according to four sources briefed on the matter. The exact timing of the cuts remains unclear; sources tell CBS News the staff reductions have been in the works for months but were temporarily on hold because of rising tensions overseas after the recent U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The decision has raised concerns among the nation's police and intelligence gathering agencies, as the U.S. reckons with a heightened threat environment. DHS' Office of Intelligence & Analysis — created after the September 11 terrorist attacks — is the only member of the U.S. intelligence community tasked with sharing threat information to state, local, tribal and territorial governments across the country. Last month, the current head of the agency, Daniel Tamburello, informed the intelligence agency's workforce that DHS Secretary Kristi Noem had signed off on plans to slash the agency by hundreds of employees, with others reassigned to other DHS components, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. This week, House and Senate lawmakers wrote to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, warning them to avoid "this drastic and unilateral step and instead to consult with Congress about alternative ways to make I&A as effective and efficient as possible." "At a time when DHS is rightly warning about an elevated threat environment from terrorists and cartels, we should be focused on plugging security gaps rather than senselessly creating new ones," Democratic Reps. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Jim Himes of Connecticut wrote Wednesday, along with Michigan Sen. Gary Peters and minority leaders on the House Homeland Security Committee, House Intelligence Committee and Senate Homeland Security Committee. Several law enforcement agencies — including the Major Cities Chiefs Association, County Sheriffs of America and the Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies — also penned a letter to Noem, pressing her to reconsider. They warned that any downsizing of the intelligence agency could prevent "vital intelligence" from reaching the officers and investigators whose job it is to detect and disrupt threats and could create "dangerous blind spots in our homeland security network." "[Intelligence and Analysis] is the only component of the U.S. intelligence community with a statutory mandate to share threat information with state and local partners," the letter stated. "The current threat landscape makes our partnership with [Intelligence and Analysis] more critical than ever. Ongoing Middle East conflicts heighten risks of foreign-directed and homegrown violent extremism, as demonstrated by the recent antisemitic attack in Boulder, Colorado. Transnational criminal organizations continue to shift fentanyl trafficking routes, requiring real time intelligence to intercept deadly substances before they reach our streets… Weakening [Intelligence & Analysis] would undermine our ability to detect and prevent threats before they occur." Mike Sena, president of the National Fusion Center Association, a network of 2,000 public safety officials operating as hubs of information sharing and threat analysis for local law enforcement, also wrote to congressional leaders on the House Appropriations Committee last month. He warned that "any reduction in [Intelligence and Analysis'] field-based presence, staffing, or engagement capabilities would negatively impact the critical information flow and coordination necessary to identify and mitigate emerging threats to our communities." Leaders within the National Sheriffs' Associations had a similar message for congressional leaders last month, writing in a letter to GOP Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, that "[Intelligence & Analysis] is a critical partner in the operations of many of the country's regional fusion centers… at the center of detecting threats from organized crime, threats to election security, and threats from domestic violence extremism." Last month, the Department of Homeland Security activated its National Terrorism Advisory System, alerting more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide of possible "violent extremists and hate crime perpetrators seeking to attack targets perceived to be Jewish, pro-Israel, or linked to the US government or military in the Homeland." "US law enforcement has disrupted multiple potentially lethal Iranian-backed plots in the United States since 2020," the bulletin read. "During this timeframe, the Iranian government has also unsuccessfully targeted critics of its regime who are based in the Homeland for lethal attack. Offices within the intelligence community, including the CIA and National Security Agency, have faced similar buyouts and workforce reductions in recent months, as well as the nation's top cyber defense agency. The cuts were first reported by NextGov/FCW. DHS' intelligence wing has faced some criticism in recent years for its collection of intelligence on journalists and protesters during the George Floyd protests in 2020, plus its failure to disseminate critical intelligence ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. While testifying before Congress, Matthew Kozma, Trump's new pick to lead Intelligence & Analysis, underscored the importance of reinforcing the federal government's talent pipeline, telling lawmakers, "It's imperative that [the agency's] analysts be informed, educated and trained on the latest know-how and toolsets to optimally apply available knowledge, insights, and acumen for mission accomplishment." "Our intelligence and analytical tradecraft requires a unique combination of skill, curiosity, dedication, vigilance, and trustworthiness to ensure that the information and intelligence we extract and share is correct, comprehensive, and corroborated," Kozma said in his opening statement.

Supreme Court to review state bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports
Supreme Court to review state bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports

New York Post

time24 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Supreme Court to review state bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports

The Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear a case that will determine whether transgender female student athletes can be prevented from joining girls and women's sports teams at public schools. The justices are set to hear challenges to laws in Idaho and West Virginia after lower court rulings in sided with transgender students who sued when they were blocked from competing. 'I am optimistic that after hearing the case, the Supreme Court will restore sanity to athletics and allow West Virginia to enforce its commonsense law that prevents boys from competing in girl's sports,' Mountain State Gov. Patrick Morrisey fired off in an X post. Advertisement The Supreme Court agreed Thursday to review whether transgender student athletes can be banned from joining female sports teams at public schools. AP Twenty-seven states have passed laws in recent years that restrict participation in female sports for male-to-female trans students. In Idaho and West Virginia specifically, state laws specify that sports teams at public schools are based on 'biological sex' and ban 'students of the male sex' from joining female athletic teams. Advertisement The challenge to the West Virginia law was brought by Becky Pepper-Jackson in 2021 after her middle school banned her from joining the girls' cross country and track teams. Pepper-Jackson has been taking puberty-blocking medication and has publicly identified as a girl since she was in the third grade. The justices are set to hear two cases out of Idaho and West Virginia after earlier lower court rulings in each state sided with transgender students who sued. Getty Images A federal judge initially ruled in the student's favor at an early stage of the case, but later reversed course and ended up siding with the state. Advertisement The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Jackson's exclusion from girls' teams violated Title IX, which forbids sex discrimination in education. '[Pepper-Jackson] has been publicly living as a girl for more than five years. During that time, her elementary and middle schools created gender support plans to affirm her gender identity and ensure she is recognized as a girl at school,' the appeals court ruling read. 'To align with her gender identity, [Pepper-Jackson] has changed her name, and the State of West Virginia (whose Act is challenged here) has issued a birth certificate that recognizes her changed name and lists her sex as female. [Pepper-Jackson] also takes puberty blocking medication to prevent her body from experiencing male adolescent development and estrogen hormone therapy, which is leading her to develop the outward physical characteristics—including fat distribution, pelvic shape, and bone size—of an adolescent female. Her family, teachers, and classmates have all known [Pepper-Jackson] as a girl for several years, and—beginning in elementary school—she has participated only on girls athletic teams. 'Given these facts, offering [Pepper-Jackson] a 'choice' between not participating in sports and participating only on boys teams is no real choice at all.' Meanwhile, the Idaho challenge was brought by Lindsay Hecox — a trans Boise State University student who had tried to join the women's track and cross-country teams, but failed to qualify. Advertisement Instead, Hecox has participating in sports clubs, including soccer and running, at the public university. A federal judge blocked Idaho's law in 2020, ruling that it likely violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause and unlawfully discriminated based on sex and transgender status. The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld initial ruling in 2023 and again in an amended ruling last year. While the Supreme Court agreed to take up the cases from Idaho and West Virginia, the justices opted not to act on a third case from Arizona that raises the same issue. The cases will be heard sometime after the justices convene for the new court term Oct. 6. Last month, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee's ban on transgender puberty blockers and hormone therapy treatments for minors — a major win for states that have similar laws on the books. With Post wires

L.A. activist indicted after handing out face shields to anti-ICE protesters
L.A. activist indicted after handing out face shields to anti-ICE protesters

Los Angeles Times

time28 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

L.A. activist indicted after handing out face shields to anti-ICE protesters

A local activist who handed out protective face shields to protesters last month during demonstrations against the Trump administration's chaotic immigration raids was indicted by a federal grand jury Wednesday. Alejandro Orellana, a 29-year-old member of the Boyle Heights-based community organization Centro CSO, faces charges of conspiracy and aiding and abetting civil disorder, court records show. According to the indictment, Orellana and at least two others drove around downtown L.A. in a pickup truck distributing Uvex Bionic face shields and other items to a crowd engaged in a protest near the federal building on Los Angeles Street on June 9. Prosecutors allege Orellana was helping protesters withstand less-lethal munitions being deployed by Los Angeles police officers and Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies after an unlawful assembly had been declared. . Orellana is due in court on Thursday morning. An e-mail to his federal public defender seeking comment was not immediately returned. U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, a former California Assemblyman appointed by President Trump, has promised to aggressively prosecute anyone who interferes with immigration enforcement operations or harms police during protests. Federal prosecutors have brought at least 14 cases related to last month's demonstrations and Essayli promised more people will be charged. Asked how handing out defensive equipment was a crime during a news conference last month, Essayli insisted Orellana was specifically handing out supplies to violent demonstrators. 'He wasn't handing masks out at the beach. ... They're covering their faces. They're wearing backpacks. These weren't peaceful protesters,' he said. 'They weren't holding up signs, with a political message. They came to do violence.' Essayli described anyone who remained at a protest scene after an unlawful assembly as a 'rioter' and said peaceful protesters 'don't need a face shield.' Orellana, who works for United Parcel Service, has no criminal record and previously served in the U.S. Marines, according to Carlos Montes, a fellow member of Centro CSO. Montes said he believes Essayli is specifically targeting Centro CSO for its pro-immigrant activism, noting FBI agents seized another member's cellphone last week as part of their investigation into Orellana. 'It's ridiculous charges. We're demanding they drop the charges now. They're insignificant, ridiculous,' Montes said. 'The most it amounts to is that he was passing out personal protective equipment, which includes boxes of water, hand sanitizer and snacks.' A spokesperson for the U.S. Marine Corps did not immediately respond to a request for Orellana's service record. Montes also challenged Essayli's argument that peaceful protesters have no need for protective equipment, pointing to myriad instances in which people have been seriously injured by Los Angeles police and county sheriff's deputies in recent years. A Times investigation last month highlighted incidents where protesters allege LAPD officers fired rubber rounds and other crowd control munitions without warning in recent weeks, causing demonstrators and members of the media to suffer broken bones, concussions and other forms of severe harm. Times staff writer Brittny Mejia contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store