Supreme Court Blocks North Dakota Ruling on Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court has intervened in a significant redistricting dispute in North Dakota, blocking a lower-court ruling that could undermine a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. On Thursday, the justices issued an unsigned order that halts the implementation of a federal appeals court decision, which would restrict the ability of individuals and civil rights groups to file lawsuits under this landmark legislation.

This case centers on the legislative map approved in 2021, which the Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians contend dilutes their voting power, hindering their ability to elect candidates of their choice. The issue is particularly pressing for these tribes, whose reservations are approximately 60 miles apart. Following a trial in 2023, a federal judge ruled in favor of using a map that enabled the election of three Native American candidates, all Democrats, to North Dakota’s Republican-supermajority Legislature.

In May, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 ruling that asserted only the Justice Department could initiate lawsuits under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. This decision conflicts with a long-standing judicial precedent that affirms the rights of private individuals to sue under the same provision. As noted by Richard Hasen, a law professor at UCLA, over 90 percent of Section 2 cases have typically been brought through private enforcement.

Potential Broader Implications

The Supreme Court’s decision to block the lower ruling suggests that it may take up the case for further consideration, with oral arguments potentially scheduled for as early as 2026 and a ruling expected by the summer of that year. Notably, three conservative justices—Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas—dissented, indicating a desire to allow the appeals court ruling to stand.

This case is one of two significant redistricting disputes currently before the Supreme Court. The other involves a second majority-Black congressional district in Louisiana, where the justices have called for additional arguments to be presented during their term starting in October. The issues to be discussed in this separate case have yet to be detailed.

The 8th Circuit Court, which oversees seven states—including North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Arkansas—has recently made determinations that challenge the ability of individuals to enforce their voting rights. Following its ruling in the Arkansas case earlier this year, various states, including Minnesota, have sought to strengthen voting rights through state-level protections.

The ongoing legal battles underscore the importance of individual rights in the electoral process and could have lasting implications on voting access across the United States. As the Supreme Court prepares to address these complex issues, the outcome will likely resonate beyond North Dakota, influencing the landscape of voting rights nationwide.