A federal judge in San Antonio will hear arguments Thursday over whether Texas should have to clear its political maps with the federal government in 2021.
Any ruling on this question would be a test of a little-known part of the Voting Rights Act, sweeping legislation passed during the civil rights movement.
鈥淭his is pretty uncharted territory,鈥� said Michael Li, senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice鈥檚 Democracy Program. 鈥淭exas will be the first big test of this, and so it鈥檚 something that certainly people around the country are watching closely.鈥�
The hearing is part of a larger lawsuit from Texas voters who challenged the state鈥檚 2011 redistricting efforts. A few years ago, courts found that state officials against racial minorities when they drew those maps and ordered parts of the maps to be redrawn.
This latest legal challenge will test a provision in Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act. The provision could require any state, county or city that is found to have intentionally discriminated against voters to be put under federal preclearance. That means the jurisdiction would have to clear any political maps or voting or election laws with either the U.S. Department of Justice or a federal court.
Texas had been under federal preclearance several years ago under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which mandated preclearance for states and local governments with a history of racist voting laws. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down that part of the law in 2013, though.
Since then, the only way to require federal oversight of election laws is through litigation.
鈥淭he Texas case will be a big test of whether the Voting Rights Act has any teeth after the gutting of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act,鈥� Li said.
Nina Perales, the vice president of litigation for MALDEF, said there's evidence Texas officials have discriminated against communities of color.
鈥淭he fact that Texas has not just recently discriminated on the basis of race in redistricting, but that also this voter purge targeted naturalized citizens is very relevant to the consideration about what the courts should do next with Texas,鈥� she said.
, Texas officials agreed to stop a flawed effort to remove alleged noncitizens from the state鈥檚 voter rolls after evidence that many of the flagged voters were recently naturalized citizens.
If the court sides with the plaintiffs in the latest case, the state will have to clear only maps 鈥� not voting laws 鈥� with the federal government.
According to Li, what the plaintiffs are asking for would apply only to statewide redistricting plans within a relatively short period of time. One proposal is requesting federal preclearance until 2030; another seeks just five years of oversight.
鈥淚t鈥檚 a limited thing to get through the next round of redistricting,鈥� Li said.
The state鈥檚 legal team has argued even limited federal preclearance is not necessary, because the state isn鈥檛 using the 2011 maps that were struck down.
If the courts side with the plaintiffs, Li said, it would be a 鈥渉uge power shift."
鈥淭he burden would be on the state of Texas to prove that the maps weren鈥檛 discriminatory and it hadn鈥檛 reduced minority voting power,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t sort of puts the burden on the state instead of on individual plaintiffs and individual voters."
Copyright 2020 KUT 90.5. To see more, visit . 9(MDAxODQzOTgwMDEyMTcyNjI4MTAxYWQyMw004))
