The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) sidestepped weighing in on Voting Rights Act (VRA) cases brought by Native American tribes and Advocacy groups, ordering lower courts to reexamine a pair of cases involving whether private individuals and groups can sue to enforce a significant provision of the Voting Rights Act that prohibits discriminatory voting practices.
According to NPR, the high court issued a brief, unsigned order announcing its decision to send cases about Mississippi and North Dakota state legislative maps back to lower courts for further proceedings in light of its recent ruling in Louisiana v. Callais.
The Two Cases Regarding Section 2 of the VRA
The two cases related to SCOTUS’ recent order involve Section 2 of the VRA. Both cases separately challenged legislative maps drawn in Mississippi and North Dakota after the 2020 census, deeming them a violation of the provision.
According to CBS News, the case in Mississippi was brought by the state’s NAACP chapter and 14 separate voters.
In North Dakota, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and three Native American voters grouped to challenge the maps.
In both cases, the plaintiffs won before the district courts.
State officials in both cases fired back, arguing that under the provision, only the U.S. attorney general has the right to sue, not private individuals or advocacy groups.
A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit sided with North Dakota officials, while the Mississippi case was authorized to appeal directly to the high court.
Justice Jackson's Dissent Against the High Court's Decision
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized the Supreme Court’s decision not to weigh in on the “private right of action” under the provision, pointing out that the high court did not address the legality of whether private individuals and groups can sue under Section 2.
"I see no basis for vacating the lower court's judgment," Justice Jackson said, dissenting from the decision to throw out earlier lower court rulings in both cases.
