A small Texas county was sued by President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice ( DOJ) for drawing its district map in a way that eliminated a single Democrat-held county seat, alleging that the drawing of the map was in violation of the Voting Rights Act (VRA ). However, the county’s lawsuit against the county had backfire and probably sway Democrat-held parliamentary seats after the region called its bluff and filed a lawsuit over so-called” coalition districts.”
Democrat Stephen Holmes controls the Precinct 3 in Galveston County, which has long been a Democrat enclave. Until recently, the state lines had been drawn in such a way that they created a” partnership city”, according to Paul Ready, general counsel for Galveston County. A” coalition district” is a city in which no minority group can form a lot, but many minority parties are combined to form a majority-minority area to increase the chances of electing a member who is frequently a Democrat, Set explained to The Federalist.
Galveston County’s short to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, obtained by The Federalist, alleges that partnership regions “present democratic, no cultural, relationships”.
Democrats claim coalition districts have used these kinds of districts to stifle social control by combining various minority groups into a single majority-minority district, according to Set. They also claim that coalition districts have compliance with the VRA. The Biden DOJ is currently taking that location.
Instead of putting up several minority groups that add up to a lot, Galveston County contends that the VRA is only valid if a single racial minority group is present enough to form a region in which that racial group constitutes the majority. At least a dozen Democrat-held parliamentary seats could later be restored if Galveston County prevails, according to its attorneys, putting pressure on Democrats to lose support in Washington.  ,  ,
The Map
Galveston County is predominantly light, with the state’s black and Hispanic population finance for a combined 38.6 percentage, according to Galveston County’s short. Between 2010 and 2020, the county reports, its population “increased by almost 60, 000 people” and, more specifically, the” Hispanic population increased from 22 % to 25 %” while the black population “decreased from 14 % to 12 %”, according to the county’s brief. Judge Mark Henry of Galveston County explained to The Federalist that the county’s northwestern region saw the greatest growth in population. Henry serves as state judge in the Galveston Commissioners Court, where he is joined by four commission, one of whom represents Precinct 3.
To better reflect the growing people, the state redrew its outlines after the 2020 census came up. Galveston County did not require redrawing its charts because it had already received the Supreme Court’s landmark 2013 selection in Shelby County v. Holder, which concluded that the VRA’s criteria for determining which regional election regions required additional scrutiny by the DOJ were outdated and illegal.  ,
Galveston County was still subject to other VRA provisions, including Section 2, which states that” a protected class of citizens [ …] have less opportunity than other electorate members to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice.” Simply put, a minority group would need to demonstrate that they had the right to choose a district representative of their choosing if district lines prevented that choice.
Notably, Section 2 was rewritten in the 1980s after a court ruled the original phrasing only barred intentional discrimination, as The New York Times reported. According to the Times, the law was changed so that it could be used to challenge a districting plan that “had the effect of diluting minority voting strength, without the need to prove intent.”
According to Galveston County, there was not enough black or Latino population to create a majority-Latino or majority-black district, a fact that, as the District Court for the Southern District of Texas acknowledged before the county’s appeal to the 5th Circuit acknowledged, “both parties agree.”
Thus, Galveston County contends that because the VRA only applies if a single minority group is compact and sufficiently sized to make up a majority, it did not need to preserve a district where a majority is cobbled together from multiple racial minority groups. The DOJ sued the county, arguing the VRA does protect coalition districts.
Not DOJ’s First Time Meddling In Galveston County
A map proposal put forth by Galveston County in 2011 was previously rejected by the DOJ, who argued that the proposal would reduce the black population while increasing the Hispanic and white populations.
The DOJ argued that moving Galveston County’s Bolivar Peninsula would result in a decrease in black voters ‘” share of the electorate in Precinct 3 while increasing both the Hispanic and Anglo populations.”
In a 2012 Statement of Interest, the DOJ said that the county’s decision to decrease the black population of Precinct 3 from 35.2 percent to 30.8 percent while increasing the Hispanic population from 25.7 percent to 27.8 percent resulted “in an overall decrease of 2.3 percentage points in the precinct’s minority voting age population”.
According to Galveston County’s brief, the DOJ negotiated a new plan with the county that “decreased the Hispanic population while increasing the African American population” to address their concern. Galveston County contends that the DOJ prioritized black voters over Latino voters, despite the fact that that map was adopted, Ready told the Federalist.  ,
How the Case Could Upend Congress
Before calling for the entire 5th Circuit panel to consider the legality of coalition districts, a three-judge panel conducted the case.
The three judges stated in a per curiam decision in November that earlier decisions that accepted coalition claims were “wrong as a matter of law.”
In December, the 5th Circuit granted Galveston County’s request to hold off on any changes to the county’s map until the appeal is resolved. In accordance with the stay, nine judges wrote that “at the end of the day, plaintiffs would read 2 require race-based redistricting with no logical endpoint.” The County has demonstrated a chance of succeeding in arguing that is unlawful.
Ready explained to The Federalist that if the 5th Circuit rules in favor of Galveston County, using the VRA to create coalition districts would be illegal in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. If the Supreme Court does not reach a decision on the matter, which Ready said is likely, coalition districts in other states would remain unaffected.
Hans von Spakovsky, a professor of constitutional law, stated to The Federalist that Galveston County’s case is likely to be decided favorably by the 5th Circuit.
Ready believes there are at least five current House seats held by Democrats in Texas that could be affected should the 5th Circuit rule” coalition districts” are illegal: Texas ‘ 7th District ( Houston ), 9th District ( Houston ), 18th District ( Houston ), 30th District ( Dallas ), and 32nd District ( Dallas ).
According to Ready,” The Supreme Court will likely hear this case after the Fifth Circuit issues its decision for two reasons.” In order to ensure consistency in federal law across the country, the Supreme Court is more likely to hear cases where the courts of appeal are split. No matter what the 5th Circuit decides, there will be a split on the issue of coalition districts because at least one other court of appeals has chosen the wrong path.
” Second, the entire Supreme Court considered the stay application in this case within days last December, which shows that the Justices of the Supreme Court think this is important”, Ready continued.
Spakovsky and Spakovsky both agreed that the U.S. Supreme Court should take the case if there was a “prime priority reason” for the split in the appeals courts. He also pointed out that if the DOJ and its co-plaintiffs lose in the 5th Circuit, they might be reluctant to file an appeal to the Supreme Court out of concern that other coalition districts in areas that are not served by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals may be threatening.
Should the Supreme Court hear the case and rule in favor of Galveston County, Ready believes these 10″ coalition districts” could be upended: Florida’s 10th District ( Orlando ), 14th District ( Tampa), 24th District ( Miami), and 25th District ( Fort Lauderdale ), Georgia’s 7th District ( Marietta ), Indiana’s 7th District ( Indianapolis ), North Carolina’s 1st and 12th Districts ( Charlotte ), Ohio’s 11th District, and South Carolina’s 6th District ( Columbia ).
Democrats are currently in all of those districts.
Brianna Lyman is a correspondent for The Federalist on elections.
