SCOTUS agrees: ND case could be affected by ruling

As we previously reported, the U.S. Supreme Court’s striking down of racially motivated gerrymandering (previously common under the Voting Rights Act) in a Louisiana case could have an impact on one or more North Dakota cases.

The Supreme Court apparently agrees, as Monday it vacated a previous ruling of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in one of the North Dakota cases. It instructed the 8th Circuit to reconsider its findings in light of the recent Louisiana v. Callais decision — the case which prompted the new court precedent.

The Appeals Court ruling in the North Dakota case hinged upon a question as to who had standing to sue under such cases but the redistricting and the case had largely been based upon the High Court’s previous, now defunct, precedent.

The Court’s action is significant because, although its Louisiana decision dealt solely with congressional districts, on the federal level, the North Dakota cases dealt only with the drawing the boundaries of state legislative districts. That signals the Court’s recognition that its current precedent will have impacts beyond congressional district lines and will likely affect state legislative districts, as well.

The impact broadens

We indicated in our previous report that SCOTUS’s new doctrine — drawing legislative districts for racial purposes is discriminatory and unconstitutional — would likely affect state legislative districts, as well as congressional districts, because they’re based upon the same precedent. The Court’s most recent action makes it clear that it will.

The premise for drawing legislative districts (just as congressional districts had been gerrymandered) along racial lines appears to soundly underpin the High Court’s most recent action this week. The North Dakota redistricting and subsequent court case had hinged upon the notion that legislative districts should be fashioned for racial advantage — the very judicial doctrine the Court overturned in the Louisiana v Callais decision. It’s now clear that states should take heed, with respect to their legislative districts, as well.

The Supreme Court also took similar action in another case — this one out of Mississippi — on the same day as it vacated the Appeals Court’s decision in the North Dakota case.

There’s been no word yet as to whether the other lawsuit spawned by the North Dakota Legislature’s ill-advised redistricting for racial reasons might also be re-litigated, in light of the SCOTUS clarification of the Voting Rights Act, striking down racial gerrymandering, but it would certainly seem a potential, if not likely, outcome.