Nessel joins Democrat AGs calling on Supreme Court to safeguard voting

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined 22 other states in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a lower-court decision that, if upheld, would prevent individuals from suing for racial discrimination within the Voting Rights Act.

Nessel signed on to an amicus brief in the case that argues it is critical that individuals are given the opportunity to seek recourse.

“If individuals are stripped of their ability to enforce the Voting Rights Act, everyday Americans will have little control in protecting their own right to vote,” Nessel said.

This legal battle first began in 2022, when individual voters and two Native American tribes filed Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe under Section Two of the Voting Rights Act. Section Two of the law specifically prohibited state and local governments from taking steps to deny or restrict voting rights based on race. For 60 years, since the passage of the act, individuals and the U.S. Attorney General have been allowed to sue for believed violations of those rights.

That lawsuit challenged North Dakota’s legislative map, arguing it diluted tribal votes.

“Instead of creating fair boundaries as outlined in the Voting Rights Act, the map adopted by the North Dakota Legislature in 2021 silences Native American voters on every issue, lowers the chance Native voters could elect a candidate they feel best represents their community, and prevents communities in these splintered districts from receiving a fair share of public resources,” said Spirit Lake Tribe Chair Douglas Yankton, Sr.

While a district court sided with the plaintiffs in the case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit overturned that ruling. In a historic move, the court ruled that individual voters and organizations cannot sue to enforce Section Two.

Under that interpretation, only the U.S. Attorney General would have the authority to sue in those cases.

In a win for the plaintiffs, and the multi-state coalition, the Supreme Court already temporarily halted the implementation of the Eighth Circuit’s ruling.

“Relying only on the U.S. Attorney General to bring these cases puts communities at the mercy of political officials, and I urge the Supreme Court to review this decision to preserve the fundamental protections of our democracy,” Nessel said.

The amicus brief, which 22 attorneys generals have signed onto, argues that relying exclusively on the U.S. Attorney General would be insufficient to protect voters from racial discrimination.

It pointed out that 92.5% of the 1,519 legal challenges filed under Section Two between 1982 and 2024 were submitted by private citizens.

“Private enforcement is the linchpin to ensuring that the VRA’s protections are a reality for all voters,” the brief states. “Private enforcement of the VRA is critical because private plaintiffs are best suited to vindicate their own voting rights. Their opportunity to do so should not depend on government resources, priorities, or discretion.”

The coalition, which is made up entirely of Democrat attorney generals, argues that the U.S. Attorney General would not have the resources to ensure citizens’ rights are fully protected.