Filed Date: June 28, 2006
Closed Date: April 14, 2009
Clearinghouse coding complete
The United States of America (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on June 8, 2008, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, over violations of Sections 208 and 4(f)(4) of the Voting Rights Act arising from Brazos County, Texas’s and its officials’ (collectively, “Defendants”) election practices and procedures affecting Spanish-speaking voters. Section 208 provides that "any voter who requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, disability or inability to read or write may be given assistance.” Plaintiff alleged that Defendants prevented certain limited English proficient Spanish-speaking voters from securing assistance at the polls necessary for their participation in the voting process. The case was assigned to Judge David Hittner.
Plaintiff alleged Defendants did not comply with the bilingual election requirements of the Voting Rights Act by failing to provide an adequate number of bilingual poll officials trained to assist Spanish-speaking voters on election day, and by failing to provide in an effective manner certain election-related information to Spanish-speaking voters. To avoid protracted and costly litigation, the parties agreed to a Consent Decree (the "Decree").
Defendants admitted that they did not fully comply with the provisions of Sections 4(f)(4) and 208, and stipulated to the following provisions of the Decree, which the Court entered on June 29, 2006:
(1) Defendants were permanently enjoined from: (a) Prohibiting any voter from being given assistance to vote; and (b) failing to provide in Spanish any registration or voting notices, forms, instructions, assistance, or other materials or information relating to the electoral process.
(2) Defendants had to ensure that Spanish-speaking voters are permitted assistance from a trained bilingual poll official of choice.
(3) Defendants had to ensure translation and dissemination of election-related materials in Spanish.
(4) Spanish language assistance had to be made available at all locations where election-related transactions are conducted.
(5) Defendants had to train all poll officials and other election personnel regarding the provisions of Sections 208 and 4(f)(4), and train all bilingual poll officials on Spanish language election terminology, voting instructions, and other election-related issues.
(6) Defendants had to investigate complaints about poll officials.
(7) Defendants had to retain a Spanish language election coordinator.
(8) Defendants had to establish an Advisory Group to assist and inform the Spanish language election program.
(9) Appointment of a federal examiner was authorized.
(10) Defendants had to evaluate the Spanish language election program.
(11) Defendants had to retain documents and reporting requirements.
The parties agreed that the Decree would remain in effect through March 1, 2009. On April 14, 2009, Plaintiffs filed a notice that the Decree appropriately expired as scheduled. The case is now closed.
Summary Authors
Patrick Hagen (11/22/2023)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68030413/parties/united-states-v-brazos-county-texas/
Hittner, David (Texas)
Jr, Donald J (Texas)
O'Donnell, Sean William (Texas)
Slade, Jared Michael (Texas)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68030413/united-states-v-brazos-county-texas/
Last updated Aug. 10, 2025, 9:56 p.m.
State / Territory: Texas
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 28, 2006
Closing Date: April 14, 2009
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
United States
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Brazos County (Brazos), County
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Provide antidiscrimination training
Order Duration: 2006 - 2009
Issues
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Language(s):
Voting: