Latest Breaking News

Igel

(37,072 posts)

5. But the appellate court ruled that individuals lack standing to challenge claimed violations of the VRA.

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 07:52 PM

Jul 17

Don't accept the appeal, the appellate court's ruling stands. And the Chippewas would lack standing to challenge the redistricting.

Instead, they haven't decided whether to accept the case. Don't see why they wouldn't unless either this reconciles a difference in opinion between circuit courts or there's disagreement with the appellate court's ruling.

The Chippewa certainly wanted this outcome.

“They [ the appellate court] knee-cap Congress’s most important civil rights statute,” the tribes wrote in their application asking the high court to intervene. “That blow is especially harmful to Native Americans and these Plaintiffs in particular. North Dakota — like many states — has a long and sad history of official discrimination against Native Americans that persists to this day.”

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Earth Bound Misfit ancianita

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court justice pauses ruling weakening Voting Rights Act [View all] BumRushDaShow Jul 16 OP

So what does Kavanaugh's "pause" on an appeals court ruling actually tell us. ancianita Jul 16 #1

That the DOJ can force texas to redistrict? SSJVegeta Jul 16 #2

My initial thought was that he was following the law and rules of procedure. TomSlick Jul 16 #3

I think it's the appellate courts that decide on whether rules of procedure have been followed. It's not outside ancianita Jul 16 #4

But the appellate court ruled that individuals lack standing to challenge claimed violations of the VRA. Igel Jul 17 #5

I'll take your considered word for it. I just thought that the original court decided standing, and that the appellate ancianita Jul 17 #6