Clark v. Roemer

Background

Louisiana state officials sought to hold judicial elections on November 6 and December 8, 1990 for judgeships created by recent state laws. The United States District Court found those creating acts had not received required federal preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. An emergency application about those elections was presented to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court, which modified its prior November 2, 1990 order and addressed the request.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Court should stop the scheduled elections because the laws creating those offices lacked Section 5 preclearance. The Court granted the application in part: it enjoined Louisiana officials from holding the specific November and December 1990 judicial elections listed in Part II of the District Court’s October 22, 1990 order, with two named divisions excepted as precleared. In all other respects the application was denied. The injunction is conditioned on the timely filing of a statement as to jurisdiction in the appeal; if filed, the order remains in effect while the appeal proceeds.

Real world impact

As a result, a set of scheduled judicial races across multiple Louisiana districts cannot go forward immediately. Candidates and voters for the listed judgeships face delays or cancellations until the Court resolves the appeal or the appeal ends. If the lower-court judgments are affirmed or the appeal is dismissed, the injunction ends automatically; if the Court notes probable jurisdiction or reverses, the injunction stays in effect while the Court’s judgment is sent down.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White dissented. Justice Blackmun concurred in part and dissented in part, saying he would have denied the application in full.