Paxton's bids in redistricting case rejected
Federal court clears way for July trial over whether maps biased.
A federal court panel handed two significant losses to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday, moving a large step closer to a summer trial to determine whether boundaries for the U.S. House and Texas House violate the rights of minority voters.
First, the three-judge panel rejected Paxton’s request to toss out claims that the Legislature adopted the maps in 2013 with the intent to discriminate against Latino and African-American voters.
The allegation is central to efforts to draw new districts that would allow the election of additional minority-favored — and presumably Democratic — candidates.
In a separate order, the judges declined to give Paxton permission to appeal an earlier ruling that said Republicans in the Legislature intentionally discriminated against minority voters when congressional districts were drawn in 2011. Texas needed the federal court’s permission to appeal because that ruling was not a final order in the case.
Monday’s decisions from the San Antonio-based court were followed by an order scheduling a five-day trial beginning July 10 on the current maps — marking the beginning of the end of a yearslong legal challenge that has hung over every statewide election this decade.
“That’s the one everyone is anticipating,” said Renea Hicks, an Austin lawyer representing plaintiffs including the city of Austin, Travis County and state Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin. “The last hurdles are being cleared away so we can get it done.”
Paxton had asked the court to reject claims that the 2013 maps were adopted to intentionally discriminate against minority voters in violation of the Constitution’s
14th Amendment.
The Legislature, Paxton argued, could not be held accountable because lawmakers merely adopted maps that had originally been drawn by the three- judge court in 2012 to cure voting rights problems that had been identified in the 2011 maps.
“The Legislature was entitled to presume that this court acted in good faith and without a racially discriminatory purpose,” Paxton argued.
But, the court ruled Monday, the legal challenges focus on the intent of lawmakers, not judges, in adopt
ing the U.S. House and Texas House district maps. Resolving those claims involves matters not appropriately decided on summary judg- ment, the order said.
The court’s decision to deny Paxton’s request to appeal came as no surprise in a two-step case that began with the court reviewing the districts drawn in 2011 — leading to separate 2-1 rulings earlier this year that the maps for the U.S. House and Texas House improperly restricted the rights of African-American and Latino voters.
During a hearing Thursday in San Antonio, the judges voiced skepticism about letting a separate appeal move forward on the 2011 congres- sional map while the panel began the final phase of the case by examining the 2013 maps.
The court is under pres- sure to provide a ruling by Oct. 1 to allow time to prepare for the 2018 elections.
Candidate filing for the primaries begins in mid-November.
Complicating the timing will be the inevitable appeal that the losing side will make directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, a move that could add weeks or months to the process.
Eager to resolve matters with election deadlines looming, the judges ended last week’s conference by ask
ing lawyers to provide blackout dates between Memorial Day and Labor Day.
In the scheduling order released Monday, the court said all claims must be tried within five days, with the trial in San Antonio to begin with the Texas House map. Witnesses, and what they will testify about, must be disclosed by June 5.
No changes or additions to the lawsuits will be allowed, the court added.