Filed Date: Nov. 5, 2021
Closed Date: May 23, 2022
Clearinghouse coding complete
The Texas State Conference of the NAACP (“NAACP”) sued Texas Governor Abbott and Texas Secretary of State John Scott on November 5, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. NAACP alleged that Texas’s newly enacted redistricting maps for the state house, the state senate, and U.S. Congress violated the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. First, NAACP asserted that race was the controlling factor the Texas legislature considered when drawing the voting maps, and that as such, the maps constituted racial gerrymandering in violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Second, NAACP claimed that the maps constituted vote dilution in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because Black, Hispanic, and Asian voters were dispersed into districts where they would become an ineffective minority. Third, NAACP alleged that the map drawers intended to decrease the voting power of voters of color in violation of Fourteenth Amendment and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The case was assigned on November 18, 2021 to Judge Robert Lee Pitman, with the other members of the panel including Judge Jerry E. Smith and Judge Jeffrey V. Brown.
NAACP sought 1) a judicial declaration that certain districts within each of the three map plans were unconstitutional and unlawful, 2) an injunction to prevent the plans from being implemented or used in future elections, and 3) a court order that new, valid maps be adopted.
On November 19, 2021, the district court consolidated the case with several other pending challenges to Texas’s redistricting plans, including League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Abbott, Wilson v. Texas, Voto Latino v. Scott, Mexican Am. Legislative Caucus v. Texas, Brooks v. Abbott, Fair Maps Texas Action Comm. v. Abbott, United States v. Texas, and Fischer v. Scott.
On May 23, 2022, the district court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims for lack of standing to pursue all three claims, and failure to state a claim with regards to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Specifically, the district court found that NAACP’s allegation that it had diverted resources to address Defendants’ conduct failed to demonstrate that the organization suffered an injury because there was legal obligation for it to expend resources. Moreover, the court found that NAACP failed to identify any specific member living in Texas who would suffer an injury. Regarding the Voting Rights Act, the court found that NAACP merely alleged the legal conclusion that Texas suffers from racially polarized voting without pleading any supporting factual allegations demonstrating cohesive voting. 604 F.Supp.3d 463.
This case is closed.
Summary Authors
Aisha Keown-Lang (1/11/2024)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60703795/parties/texas-state-conference-of-the-naacp-v-abbott/
Anderson, Jacki Lynn (Texas)
Ashton, Anthony P. (Texas)
Bender, Laura Brady (Texas)
Al-Fuhaid, Munera (Texas)
Barnes, J. Aaron (Texas)
Buser-Clancy, Thomas Paul (Texas)
Chalajour, Ariana Zahara (Texas)
Danahy, Molly Elizabeth (Texas)
Freeman, Daniel Joshua (Texas)
Gersh, Nicholas Russin (Texas)
Gladden, Richard Scott (Texas)
Golando, Martin Anthony (Texas)
Gonzalez, Joaquin Robert (Texas)
Harris, Ashley Alcantara (Texas)
Herren, Thomas Christian (Texas)
Lorenzo-Giguere, Susana (Texas)
Lucier, Jonathan Tyler (Texas)
Medina, Richard Alexander (Texas)
Notzon, Robert Stephen (Texas)
Policarpio, Khrystan Nicole (Texas)
Rhodes, Carroll Edward (Texas)
Rollins-Boyd, Marlin David (Texas)
Rupp, Michelle Christine (Texas)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60703795/texas-state-conference-of-the-naacp-v-abbott/
Last updated June 13, 2025, 10:30 p.m.