A federal judge sharply criticized his colleagues on a three-judge panel for halting the implementation of a Texas congressional map that he believes would have increased representation for minority voters. Judge Jerry Smith, in a dissenting opinion issued Friday, accused the majority of prioritizing procedural concerns over the potential for fairer elections.
The map, initially approved by a district court, was blocked by the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals on Thursday pending further review. Smith argued the pause effectively maintains a map he contends illegally diminishes the voting power of racial minorities in Texas, a state gaining critically important population.The case centers on allegations that the existing map violates the Voting Rights Act by diluting the influence of Hispanic voters. The Supreme Court will now consider whether to allow the new map to be used in the upcoming 2024 elections, with a decision expected soon.
The dispute arises from the redrawing of texas’ 38 congressional districts following the 2020 census. Civil rights groups and the Department of Justice sued,arguing the map created by the Republican-controlled state legislature intentionally weakened minority voting strength. The district court found evidence of discriminatory intent in the map’s creation, specifically regarding the drawing of districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and Houston.
The court ordered the legislature to create two additional districts where minority voters would have a greater opportunity to elect their preferred candidates. The blocked map complied with that order.The majority on the Fifth circuit, though, stayed the lower court’s ruling, citing concerns about the proximity to the election and the potential for disruption.
Smith countered that delaying the implementation of the new map would perpetuate what he views as an ongoing violation of the Voting Rights Act. He wrote that the majority’s decision “disregards the importance of allowing minority voters to exercise their fundamental right to vote in an election that is fair and representative.” The case is EveryVote Action Fund v. Abbott, No. 23-5083, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.