Whatever the court decides could impact the makeup of the next US Congress.
Federal judges who recently rejected Louisianaâs congressional election map that gave the state a second mostly black district have now ordered the state Legislature to pass a new map by June 3 or face the prospect that judges will simply impose one.
âThe Court notes that the Louisiana Legislature is in session through June 3, 2024, and this Court provides it with the opportunity to enact a new Congressional map during that time period,â the judges wrote.
âHowever, given the time limitations outlined by the Secretary of State [Doc. 217], this Court must concurrently proceed with the âunwelcome obligationâ of drawing a remedial map to ensure that a compliant map is in place in time for the 2024 congressional election,â they added.
Whatever comes out of the court could impact the makeup of the next U.S. Congress. A new mostly black district would give Democrats the chance to capture another House seat, given the prevailing voting patterns in Louisiana.
âToday, three federal judges who never spent a day running an election have ignored uncontradicted testimony that we need a map by May 15, and once again turned Louisianaâs Congressional elections upside down,â Ms. Murrill wrote, adding that the case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Background
After the veto was overridden, a coalition of plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), sued.
The appeals courtâs order noted that if the state legislature failed to adopt a new map by the deadline, the lower court should move ahead to a trial to finalize the redrawn boundaries in time for the 2024 election.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, who was Louisianaâs governor-elect at the time of the appellate court ruling, said he intended to call a special session to redraw the map.
However, the new map was challenged in court by voters who claimed that the state had engaged in the âexplicit, racial segregation of voters and intentional discrimination against voters based on race.â
They also alleged the new map violated their 14th and 15th Amendment rights.
In a 2-1 split decision on April 30, the judges sided with the plaintiffs.
In a dissent, Circuit Court Judge Carl E. Stewart, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote that he did not find the plaintiffs in the lawsuit had met their burden of establishing that the new map amounts to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
At the time, Ms. Murrill vowed to seek Supreme Court review and, in her latest May 7 statement on the matter, said, âWe will be heading this week to the U.S. Supreme Court.â
Katabella Robertson contributed to this report.
Original News Source Link – Epoch Times
Running For Office? Conservative Campaign Consulting – Election Day Strategies!