United States v. Board of Supervisors of Warren Cty.

Background

In 1970 the Warren County government in Mississippi submitted a new county redistricting plan to the Attorney General for review under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The Attorney General objected, but the county held elections in 1971 anyway. In 1973 the Attorney General sued in federal court, arguing the 1970 plan was unenforceable because it had been objected to and that the prior districts were malapportioned. A three-judge district court granted summary judgment for the United States, stayed upcoming elections, and later adopted a county plan that had not been approved under Section 5.

Reasoning

The Court reviewed whether a local district court in a Section 5 enforcement action could decide the constitutional merits about one-person-one-vote and Fifteenth Amendment claims. Relying on prior decisions, the Court held that local district courts are limited in these cases: the questions reserved for the District Court for the District of Columbia or for the Attorney General are whether a proposed change actually denies or abridges the right to vote on account of race. The Court found that the lower court exceeded its proper role by deciding constitutional questions and approving a plan without the required Section 5 clearance. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with this limit.

Real world impact

The ruling means covered counties cannot rely on a local court’s approval to enforce voting changes that lack Section 5 review. It also narrows what local courts may decide in federal voting enforcement suits brought by the Attorney General. As a result, covered jurisdictions must follow the Section 5 review procedures or seek the special declaratory process in the District of Columbia before using new voting plans.