ICYMI: NRF Supports Appellees in Two Consequential SCOTUS Cases

Contact
Jena Doyle
doyle@redistrictingfoundation.org

ICYMI: NRF Supports Appellees in Two Consequential SCOTUS Cases

“You cannot look at these cases objectively, without acknowledging the fact that taken together, they could determine whether or not the United States remains as the democracy that we have come to love.” – Eric H. Holder, Jr., the 82nd Attorney General of the United States

Washington, D.C. —  On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard the oral argument in Merrill v. Milligan, a redistricting lawsuit originally filed by Alabama voters with the support of the National Redistricting Foundation (NRF), the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC), after the Alabama Legislature enacted a discriminatory congressional map in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The NRF-supported appellees were represented before the Court by Abha Khanna, Partner for Elias Law Group. Be sure to listen to her discussion on the day’s proceedings with NRF’s Director of Litigation and Policy, Marina Jenkins, and Democracy Docket and Elias Law Group’s Founder, Marc Elias. This is the first of two redistricting cases to go before the Court this term in which the NRF is supporting the appellees. 

In addition to Merrill v. Milligan, the NRF is also supporting the appellees in Moore v. Harper, a case that will determine if state legislatures, including those that remain heavily gerrymandered by Republicans, can have near-total control over our federal elections. The Court has yet to schedule the oral argument for that case. 

As reported in Politico, Attorney General Eric Holder outlined the stakes of these cases to reporters by saying: “You cannot look at these cases objectively, without acknowledging the fact that taken together, they could determine whether or not the United States remains as the democracy that we have come to love.” 

In case you missed it, here is a sample of our additional coverage on these cases: 

The Charlotte News and Observer: NC Case at Supreme Court Should Keep ‘Every American Up at Night’, ex-AG Eric Holder says

Excerpts: 

“That potential result, I think, should keep every American up at night,” Holder said in a Q&A session last week.

…

“The stakes are higher now than they were even three, four years ago, given the number of election deniers who are running for state legislative seats, secretaries of state, governors,” said Holder, a Democrat who led the U.S. Department of Justice during Barack Obama’s presidency.

…

“The independent state legislative theory, as the North Carolina legislature would have it, would really just undermine our basic system of government, our tripartite system of checks and balances, the notion of separation of power and all the things that a lot of our fundamental democratic principles are founded upon,” said voting rights attorney Abha Khanna, a law partner of Democratic lawyer Marc Elias.

MSNBC: VIDEO - AG Holder Speaks with with Joy Reid about Merrill v. Milligan, Importance of Voting 

Excerpts: 

AG HOLDER ON MERRILL V. MILLIGAN: I do think that Justice Kagan had it exactly right, this is a slam dunk. This should not be a difficult case to resolve.  

…

AG HOLDER ON MERRILL V. MILLIGAN: Section 2 is one of the remaining components that is still a very vital part of the Act, and so that is the fear that I have. My hope will be that they look at precedent, and principle, and decide the case in the appropriate way. But here’s something I think the justices need to consider. We’ve been talking a lot over the last couple of weeks about the legitimacy of the court. At some point, when they do things totally inconsistent with precedent, with the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act….when they do those kinds of things, it makes the American people question, are we dealing with judges who are deciding things in a neutral way or are they ideological in how they interpret the law.

…

AG HOLDER ON IMPORTANCE OF VOTING: This is not a Southern thing. What we’re seeing in Ohio, in Wisconsin, throughout the country, are Republican legislatures ignoring their own Supreme Courts, doing things totally inconsistent with both their state constitutions and federal statutes…this is a nationwide fight. Between now and then, Americans all around the country have to get out there and vote like they’ve never voted before. Understand that state legislative races really matter…who controls these state legislatures is really really important, so vote up and down the ballot for candidates who will be democracy defenders. 

CNN: Supreme Court hears challenge to key section of the Voting Rights Act in redistricting case

Excerpts: 

“As uncomfortable as the political reality in Alabama might be – and as strong the temptation to shut our eyes to the tenacity of racial discrimination in voting – the courts must not blink,” attorney Abha Khanna argued in court papers representing Black voters.

…

“Black residents in Mobile, Montgomery and the greater Black Belt share deep historical, cultural and political connections,” Khanna wrote. “They could easily elect their preferred candidates in a compact congressional district drawn consistent with traditional redistricting criteria,” Khanna said.

MSNBC: VIDEO - AG Holder Sits Down with Yamiche Alcindor to Discuss Alabama Redistricting Case

Excerpt: 

AG HOLDER ON MERRILL V. MILLIGAN: It’s a microcosm of a larger problem. Gerrymandering negatively impacts the nation as a whole, but disproportionately negatively impacts people of color. This is fundamentally a question of fairness. 

NPR: How Eric Holder Views the Latest Supreme Court Challenge to the Voting Rights Act 

Excerpt: 

AG HOLDER ON MERRILL V. MILLIGAN: I think it's very significant that the three-judge panel included two Trump-appointed judges that said that the map drawn by the Alabama Republican legislature violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it failed to provide Black voters in the state the opportunity to participate equally in the political process and to be represented accordingly. This is a textbook example of a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

And I think very, very importantly, you know, in dissent … Chief Justice Roberts wrote - and I quote - "the district court properly applied existing law." And then he added - and again, I quote - "an extensive opinion with no apparent errors for our correction." This is a case that is, as Justice Kagan said in oral argument yesterday, a slam dunk.

The Alabama Political Reporter: Alabama Voting Rights group hope SCOTUS sees congressional map as gerrymandering

Excerpt: 

Former U.S. attorney general Eric Holder said this should be an easy decision for the court.

“The congressional map enacted by Alabama’s legislature—found to be racially discriminatory by lower courts—is a textbook violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act as it applies to redistricting,” Holder said. “This law that has been in place and upheld in numerous cases over the years and repeatedly reauthorized by Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support—for more than half a century—must remain intact. Anything short of that determination is simply wrong and democracy diminishing … 

“Should a Court majority ignore this, I fear we will live in a less just country that lacks accountability for those who conduct themselves in a manner that is inconsistent with the values and promises of our founding documents and who are dismissive of the desires of the people.”

###