The recent decision by a federal appeals court has significantly impacted voters in seven U.S. states, stripping them of a crucial legal recourse against racial discrimination under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A 2–1 ruling from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has altered the legal landscape for voters in a region with substantial Native populations who have historically battled voting discrimination.
Implications for Native American Voters
The case, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe, saw Native voters accusing North Dakota’s legislative map of racial bias. The Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and individual voters utilized Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and Section 1983 to argue the map diminished Native Americans’ voting power.
Historical Context and Court Precedents
For many years, private citizens and organizations have used Section 2 to challenge racial discrimination in voting. The courts have traditionally upheld the right of individuals and groups to file these cases, backed by extensive case law and Supreme Court precedents. Since the Voting Rights Act was strengthened in 1982, numerous cases have been brought under this provision, demonstrating its critical role in protecting minority voting rights.
Emerging Legal Challenges
Despite longstanding support for private enforcement of Section 2, some opponents argue that the absence of the phrase “private right of action” in the statute precludes such lawsuits. This viewpoint has gained traction, notably with the Eighth Circuit’s 2023 decision, which rejected the notion that individuals and groups could bring lawsuits under Section 2.
The Role of Section 1983
Previously, Section 1983 allowed individuals to sue government officials for civil rights violations. However, the recent ruling by the Eighth Circuit also closed this avenue, concluding that Section 2 does not establish an individual right, despite past Supreme Court decisions to the contrary.
Impact on Future Voting Rights Cases
While the Department of Justice retains the ability to bring Section 2 cases, the agency’s limited resources mean it cannot alone tackle all instances of voting discrimination. Historically, individuals and groups have initiated the majority of these cases, underscoring the importance of citizen-led enforcement.
Effect on Specific States
The ruling directly affects voters in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, particularly impacting Native communities that have achieved significant victories under Section 2. For instance, a 2024 settlement in Nebraska and past rulings in South Dakota have ensured fairer representation for Native voters, achievements now jeopardized by the recent court decision.
The Eighth Circuit’s ruling contrasts sharply with the historical application of the Voting Rights Act and calls for legislative action. Advocates urge Congress to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to strengthen the Act and secure voting rights for all Americans.
