National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New York

1973-06-21

Headline: Voting rights group blocked from joining New York’s exemption case; Court upheld denial of NAACP intervention as untimely, allowing New York counties to obtain a Voting Rights Act exemption without their participation.

Holding: The Court affirmed the district court's denial of the NAACP's motion to intervene as untimely and not an abuse of discretion, and held that an unsuccessful intervenor may directly appeal under Section 4(a) of the Voting Rights Act.

Real World Impact:

Limits late courtroom intervention by civil-rights groups in Voting Rights Act exemption cases.
Allows New York counties to seek exemption from literacy-test restrictions without NAACP participation.
Affirms Supreme Court direct review of denials of intervention in Section 4(a) suits.

Topics: voting rights, court intervention, literacy tests, redistricting, civil rights groups

Summary

Background

The dispute involved a voting-rights group (the NAACP and several Black and Puerto Rican voters) seeking to join a federal lawsuit filed by New York. New York asked a three-judge court to declare that literacy and similar voter requirements had not been used to deny voting rights in New York, Bronx, and Kings counties during the prior ten years. The Justice Department consented to New York’s request, and after that the NAACP moved to intervene but the District Court denied the motion and granted summary judgment to the State.

Reasoning

The Justices first held that an unsuccessful would-be intervenor in a Section 4(a) case can appeal directly to the Supreme Court. On the merits, the Court evaluated whether the NAACP’s intervention request was timely. Considering news reports, meetings with Justice Department lawyers, the stage of the case, the content of filings, and the looming primary elections, the Court concluded the motion was untimely and that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying intervention because intervention risked disrupting elections.

Real world impact

Practically, the ruling let New York proceed without the NAACP’s participation and cleared the way for the State’s declaratory judgment about literacy tests. The decision also confirms that denials of intervention in these Voting Rights Act suits can be reviewed directly by the Supreme Court. The District Court must retain jurisdiction for five years and may reopen the case if the Attorney General later alleges discriminatory use of a test.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Douglas and Brennan dissented. They argued the NAACP should have been allowed to intervene, criticized the Justice Department’s swift consent without fuller fact-finding, and stressed the large minority interests affected.