糖心Vlog

Congressman Michael Bost brought suit trying to prevent Illinois from counting mail ballots that are voted by election day and received within the following fourteen days, consistent with Illinois law. The Seventh Circuit ruled that Congressman Bost lacks standing to sue. Bost sought certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court on the question whether he has standing as a federal candidate to bring his lawsuit and have it decided on the merits.   While the 糖心Vlogstrongly opposes Congressman Bost鈥檚 position on the merits and has repeatedly defended similar state laws from challenge, the rules that determine whether Bost has standing to even bring his anti-voter lawsuit also apply to civil rights groups when they bring suit to expand or protect the rights of voters.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 鈥� Today, members of the U.S. Senate formally reintroduced the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (JLVRAA), a critical piece of legislation aimed at restoring and bolstering key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) that have been dismantled over the last 12 years, most notably by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder. 鈥淲e have spent the last decade fighting the unraveling of one of our nation鈥檚 most transformative civil rights achievements,鈥� said Molly McGrath, director of the ACLU鈥檚 National Director of Democracy Campaigns. 鈥淭he John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act is essential 鈥� not just to reverse the damage, but to proactively protect every voter from race-based discrimination and modern-day voter suppression. As we face threats to so many freedoms we hold dear, we must preserve the essential right to vote and therefore the ability to hold our elected officials accountable.鈥� Named in honor of the late civil rights hero Congressman John Lewis, the bill seeks to re-establish preclearance, the federal government鈥檚 authority to review and block discriminatory changes to voting laws in jurisdictions with a record of voting rights violations. It also expands that review to cover nationwide threats to voting access, such as discriminatory voter roll purges, restrictive voter ID laws, and polling place closures that disproportionately impact communities of color and people with disabilities. Since Shelby, which nullified the VRA鈥檚 preclearance provision, states across the country have enacted a vastly growing number of anti-voter laws targeting historically disenfranchised and underserved communities. The reintroduction of the JLVRAA comes at a pivotal time, as American democracy continues to face coordinated assaults on access to the ballot box. The bill outlines a modern preclearance coverage formula based on recent voting rights violations and creates greater transparency for potentially discriminatory voting changes. It has been 60 years since Bloody Sunday in Selma, Alabama, when John Lewis and hundreds of peaceful protestors were brutally attacked for demanding voting rights, and the enactment of the VRA that followed because of those protests. Those gains are under threat now more than ever. The JLVRAA honors that legacy and recommits us to the promise that all eligible voters 鈥� regardless of race, zip code, or background 鈥� deserve an equal voice in our democracy.

From restrictive legislation to inaccessible polling places, barriers persist that undermine the rights of voters with disabilities.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 鈥� Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order to reargue the case of Louisiana v. Callais and will later issue an order scheduling the argument and specifying any additional questions that will need to be addressed in the case. Louisiana鈥檚 current map with two majority-Black districts remains in effect. The re-argument of the case will likely occur during the fall. Louisiana鈥檚 current congressional map, known as S.B. 8, was drawn in response to a separate lawsuit, Robinson v. Ardoin (later Robinson v. Landry). In that earlier case, brought by the NAACP Louisiana State Conference, Power Coalition for Equity and Justice, and nine individual Black voters, a federal court in Baton Rouge found that Louisiana鈥檚 2022 map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by packing Black voters into a single majority-Black district and diluting the voting strength of Black voters in other districts. That part of the decision was upheld by two separate panels of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Presented with these decisions, the State faced a choice between drawing a new map itself or accepting a court-imposed map, over which lawmakers would have little or no control. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and legislative leaders determined it was in the State鈥檚 best interest to develop their own map that could satisfy the VRA and the courts. In January 2024, S.B. 8 became law, but it did not follow the plan that had been presented to the court in Robinson. Most notably, it was drawn to protect powerful incumbents in Louisiana鈥檚 congressional delegation, including U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, and unite communities with shared interests along the Red River and I-49 corridor. Shortly after SB8鈥檚 enactment, a group of self-described 鈥渘on-African American voters鈥� challenged the map as a racial gerrymander in violation of the 14th Amendment in Callais v. Landry. They claimed the map violated the Equal Protection Clause鈥檚 prohibition against the use of race as the predominant motivating factor in map drawing, absent a compelling reason. The plaintiffs from Robinson intervened as defendants in the case to protect the new voting opportunities S.B. 8 provided to Black Louisianans and decades of precedent, in which the Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed that it is not an unconstitutional racial gerrymander for states to remedy Voting Rights Act violations with new maps that also consider other factors like incumbency protection. After a divided three-judge district court panel struck down S.B. 8, the Robinson clients and state defendants appealed to the Supreme Court. Pending its resolution of the appeal, the Supreme Court stayed the lower court鈥檚 ruling, leaving S.B. 8 in place for the time being. As a result, the 2024 election went forward under S.B. 8, allowing Black Louisianans to elect their preferred candidate in two congressional districts. The Robinson clients and counsel provided the following statements in response to the Supreme Court鈥檚 decision today: "Before this case ever began, we had already won a hard-fought legal battle, proving that the legislature鈥檚 initial map, like Louisiana鈥檚 maps for generations before, illegally diluted Black voters鈥� political power,鈥� said Cecillia Wang, National Legal Director for the ACLU. 鈥淭hanks to the Supreme Court's order from May 2024, which put the district court鈥檚 injunction on hold, the fair and legal map the Louisiana legislature enacted in response to our litigation remains in place while the case continues. We will be back next term to once again defend the new map and the representation Black voters deserve." 鈥淎 fair and equitable congressional map has always been our North Star,鈥� said Ashley Shelton, President/CEO of Power Coalition for Equity and Justice. 鈥淭oday鈥檚 decision deferring the case does not shake our focus on that goal. We will continue to advocate for a map that reflects our communities and upholds the hope of true and substantive political representation, and we look forward to using this opportunity to continue to build Black political power for our beloved communities across Louisiana and the nation.鈥� 鈥淏lack voters in Louisiana continue to face persistent and documented discrimination. A map with two districts where Black voters have an opportunity to elect candidates of choice, as S.B. 8 has, is critical to ensuring Black voters can have their voices heard,鈥� said Stuart Naifeh, Supreme Court oralist in Callais and redistricting manager for the Legal Defense Fund (LDF). 鈥淭hat is the promise of the Voting Rights Act, and we will continue to fight on behalf of our clients and Black voters across the State of Louisiana to achieve a fair congressional map." 鈥淣ow we have another chance to make sure that the promise of equal representation for Louisiana鈥檚 Black population is fulfilled,鈥� said Alanah Odoms, 糖心Vlogof Louisiana Executive Director. 鈥淢ake no mistake: Black Louisianans are entitled to the same fair and representative maps as voters anywhere in this country. We remain steadfast in our commitment to that pursuit 鈥� until equality is not just promised, but realized.鈥� 鈥淥ur fight continues,鈥� said Michael McClanahan, President of the NAACP Louisiana State Conference. 鈥淲e know that justice must be served. From the beginning of this process, we have shown it is not only possible but essential to have fair representation for Black communities. We will continue to advocate for fair maps and to ensure the promise of the Voting Rights Act is upheld. We won鈥檛 stop until victory is won.鈥� 鈥淭oday is not the end of our journey. The fight for an equitable democracy continues,鈥� said Alora Thomas-Lundborg of the Harvard Election Law Clinic. 鈥淰oters in Louisiana took a stand for their rights and we will work to ensure that the Court hears them and everyone who believes in the continued dream of an equitable American democracy.鈥� 鈥淭his case is critically important not just for our clients, but for every Black voter in Louisiana and across this country who believes in the promise of equal representation, and today鈥檚 order calling for re-argument does nothing to change that,鈥� said Tracie Washington of the Louisiana Justice Institute. 鈥淲e remain committed to fighting for fair maps and a democracy where every vote counts. I want to thank our courageous clients, who put their faith in this process, and my remarkable co-counsel, who have poured their hearts into this case. Our work continues and our resolve is unwavering.鈥� The Robinson appellants 鈥� the NAACP Louisiana State Conference, the Power Coalition for Equity and Justice, and nine individual Black voters 鈥� are represented by the Legal Defense Fund, 糖心Vlog, 糖心Vlogof Louisiana, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, and Louisiana attorneys John Adcock and Tracie Washington.