Lopez v. Monterey County
Headline: Reverses lower court and blocks Monterey County from holding judicial elections under an unapproved at-large plan, requiring federal preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act before elections proceed.
Holding: The Court reversed the three-judge District Court and held that Monterey County cannot hold judicial elections under an unprecleared at-large plan and must obtain federal Section 5 preclearance before implementing such election changes.
- Bars Monterey County from using the unapproved at-large election plan.
- Requires covered jurisdictions to obtain federal preclearance before changing voting rules.
- Limits lower courts from ordering elections without federal Section 5 approval.
Summary
Background
Five Hispanic voters sued Monterey County after the County consolidated many small local trial court districts into a single, countywide municipal court and held elections without getting federal approval under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Section 5 requires certain covered places to get federal approval, called preclearance, before changing voting procedures. The three-judge District Court found the consolidations were covered by Section 5, tried various interim plans, and eventually ordered the County to hold at-large, countywide judicial elections in 1996 while longer-term preclearance was unresolved.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court reversed the District Court. It said Section 5 bars a covered jurisdiction from implementing voting changes unless the change has first been cleared by the U.S. Attorney General or the special federal court in Washington, D.C. The Court explained that a three-judge district court cannot allow or order elections under a voting plan that has not received that federal preclearance, because Congress assigned the initial decision about discriminatory effects to the Attorney General and the D.C. court. The Court faulted delays and ordered the District Court to require prompt submission of the County’s changes for federal review.
Real world impact
The decision means Monterey County cannot proceed with the unapproved at-large election plan and must obtain federal preclearance before implementing voting changes. It reinforces that covered jurisdictions nationwide must submit voting changes to the designated federal reviewers first. The ruling may delay local elections until the required federal review is completed, and it limits lower federal courts from substituting their own final approval for the statutorily required federal preclearance.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?