Redistricting in Alabama
On September 8th, the Alabama State Conference of the NAACP filed an Opposition to Motion to Stay filed by the Defendants in Milligan, et al. v. Allen, et al. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alabama. On September 5th, the three-judge court enjoined the State of Alabama's congressional map, finding that the 2023 Plan violates Section Two of the Voting Rights Act and that a new congressional districting plan must be devised and implemented before Alabama's upcoming congressional elections.
Government Regulation Before the Supreme Court
On September 22nd, the NAACP, along with others, filed an amicus brief in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The brief argues for the reaffirmance of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). The holding of Chevron is that a government agency must conform to any clear legislative statements when interpreting and applying a law, but courts will give the agency deference in ambiguous situations as long as its interpretation is reasonable.
Redistricting in Florida
On September 26th, a trial will begin in Common Cause Florida v. Byrd, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida (Civil Case No. 4:22-cv-00109-AW-MAF). In this lawsuit, the Florida State Conference of the NAACP and others allege intentional discrimination by the State of Florida in violation of the
14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
A thoughtful look at American history reveals that the nation's laws were never meant to serve Black Americans. But we strive to make the laws work for us through litigation at the national and local levels.
Through affirmative litigation, we aim to further our mission to ensure equitable treatment and opportunities when it comes to voting rights, education, economic empowerment, criminal justice, and health, including environmental justice. We initiate lawsuits and join as plaintiffs in state and federal cases.
We have, and will continue to, file cases that fight:
Unjust federal, state local statutes regulations
Discriminatory policies, practices procedures
Unlawful misconduct by public officers, private individuals, and companies that threaten civil rights
We don't do this work alone. We may partner with other civil rights organizations, law firms, and law schools to secure the resources necessary to assess and prosecute cases.
The NAACP Office of the General Counsel is seeking six full-time Summer 2023 Law Fellows. Law Fellows will work on a variety of civil rights cases and assist in the planning of the NAACP Legal Advocacy Institute taking place during the NAACP National Convention in July 2023. This fellowship will provide the Fellows with the opportunity to assist with ongoing litigation, develop legal education materials, and work under the supervision of attorneys to protect the NAACP brand.
The Indiana NAACP, along with the League of Women Voters of Indiana, challenged Acts 442 and 334 in court and won protection for the state's voters. The two voter purge laws aimed to allow Indiana election officials to cancel voter registrations without communication or compliance with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) process.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that Acts 442 and 334 violate the NVRA, which prohibits states from removing voters unless voters opted for removal or by going through the established process of the NVRA.
The coalition filed a suit in YEAR to stop Act 442, which allowed election officials to obtain data from a third-party database to determine voter eligibility in Indiana without notice to the voter. Similarly, Act 334 aimed to use the Indiana Data Enhancement Association (IDEA) to identify duplicate voter registrations and allow election officials to remove a voter from Indiana's voter rolls without proper notification or consent.