court similarly want i do not represent the government the same is true for him and judges there in ways the primary issue here the one indispensable in necessary party the constitution specifically says that a separately elected official the secretary of state is charged with administering the elections laws implementing it promulgating there's also and you don't have to take my word court you can take the pla that's all ministerial once you have districts where if you look at what was alleged by the plaintiffs and what was discussed by the district or they say they stalked talks specifically about the injury th mean i have the same puzzlement the judge chicken bottomed it and i would like to know what what case comes what cases there are out there anywhere in the fifty nearly sixty years after the voting rights act where this been a question of amendment case i mean we're talking about redistricting under section two of the voting rights act i got your minimal you know that's like that certain basic claim that there has to be a workable remedy there has to be a work a workable remedy in the form that judge him by the legislature could have passed a new law regarding the districts could it not well it's certainly within the purview of the standing then that's a back door to attack any law that the legislature passes but i do think that the voting rights act created a different structure well i just want to mention levi be clean hands which is a case that i don't know why they didn't raise motions to dismiss but i have a pretty good idea that with regard to the attorney general all of these other voting rights act cases also included claims under section five and the ag is the happen for a moment and sure i think that's what we're mostly about geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single member district for your use of reference and for the court's consideration we actually provided this morning and a copy of what is right for document three hundred and ninety six dollars which is th no plan or position and based on the phase of the remedial playing it is evident that you cannot satisfy jingles one because this remedial plane itself is a racial gerrymandering you can look at the the linkage argument and bet our position equipment's stands for the position that linkage is a substantial state interest automatically and judge jones in your footnote twenty three and presumably foster you cite constitutional provisions of louisiana law that still is it exists today the support the five that linkage  tremendous state interest as early as eight hundred and sixty eight knots or article five section five an article fourteen section sixteen that remains true terrible on here is a parish composed of five judges that exercise parish wide territorial jurisdiction like appellate courts where there you have a possibly functional analysis where you have to determine whether or not they they collaborate on cases that is not that is not the case in terrible i'm here and there was testimony from representative hunt down or that the reason for maintaining the out large districts was because of linkage interest there was testimony from every sitting john in the preclearance that were a settled as part of the consent decree in around the same time there was a rather imminent suit with the th j d c and so they went ahead and created the subject district overwhelmingly the other up the number of judges in louisiana and said there's one hundred and six that are elected from subdistricts out of a one hundred and seventy or eighty dies if i don't say the correct number when he didn't do talk about well one because we think it is a racial gerrymander if you look at the play and you'll see it's under populated and they barely achieve the fifty percent threshold the black voting age senses was approximately one hundred and eleven thousand dollars the minority population was roughly around eighteen thousand eight hundred dollars the voting age population which we know is what you have to be for please the court i am only eight and i represent the plaintiffs a pelleas and this straightforward voting rights act lawsuit and watch judge james brady made no clear error in finding a strong case of vote dilution this was after he held in eight days trial where he weighed the testimony and determine the credibility of twenty seven dollars witnesses including seven experts and considered over three hundred and dollars exhibits the trial court made no clear error in finding that there is a stark pattern of racially polarized voting in terrible piers elections such that no black candidate has ever won in a contested election  indeed black voters have given an average of eighty seven percent of their support to the black candidates of their choice but in those very same elections non black voters have given an average of eight percent but never more than thirteen percent of their support for the candidates preferred by black voters as a supreme court in jingles in judge higginbotham writing for the majority of the court in clark vs calhoun county found and recognized racially polarized voting the lack of black elected to the complete canceling out of black voters preferred candidates in elections a terrible parish that constitutes the heart of a voting rights act case and after giving louisiana's legislature  defendants to legislative sessions in order to cure the strong case a vote i wish in that the district court found judge shelley dead was well within her discretion to order a court drawn by me that builds upon the choices that louisiana's of officials have already made in redistricting i'm if the court doesn't have any questions about whether defendants both defendants are proper parties i will turn to the linkage argument is association the supreme court and judge higginbotham writing for the majority in commence with judge jones concurring they specifically rejected the attorney general's argument in texas that louisiana seeks to make here which is that as there is this person a substantial linkage and interests that is a question of law indeed but it is one that is not per se in fact inclement this court spent a number of pages but if found then as a matter of law that it was not substantial and it did so based upon a number of key findings the st is that louisiana's constitution unlike texas is it simply doesn't require at large voting for district  has quote abandoned its linkage interest beginning with the clark litigation but it didn't stop with that litigation it continued on voluntarily when louisiana chose to disregard subjugate its policy interest and out were voting and to voluntarily adopt district based voting not just for the louisiana supreme court the highest court in the state but also for circuit courts and trial courts the th day to see the neighbors here home parish has district bass voting can't i mean you know you say abandon is something your it's on your honor fine but that didn't have much to do with texas did it which was the subject of that lawsuit and a vandeman is not a legal thing like which minority could be elected in other words you basically get where you are now but but do it well here it's to that standard as the court recognized the way this is drawn you can do it but the question that the well the once the court have been authority and the obligation to draw a remedy it was guided by the supreme court and this is the circuits principle which has a strong preference for single member districts unless there is  substantial proof about dilution that outweighs the state's link is intra interests of the court agrees with it the court predicated that decision it looked acclamations it looked at the fact that this court went county by county and looked at racially polarized voting it looked at the number of minority elected and looked at a host of senate factors and it found that in six of the counties there was no vote i wish in only marginal vote i lucian in the of them that is in stark contrast a terrible own parish where the racially polarized voting is if not the most stark racially polarized voting that he has ever examined and one hundred voting rights cases the court predicated its substantial finding a vote dilution on the fact that seven of the th sinan factors that congress laid out the say ok it's the rare case where you find seven of the nines and in fact is way in plaintiff's favor and it is a far cry that the four only considered the ongoing record of a history of discrimination it consider the racially polarized voting it considers the lack of responsiveness sheriff for the corner for the clerk of court for the city marshal for the tax assessor for the district attorney for the parish president no black candidates have never been elected because of the stark racially polarized voting which is unassailable in this case  which is the reason why the court did not abuse its discretion in adopting a remedy to it i'd like to turn to the district courts the appropriateness of the district court's remedial order which is subject to me very demanding stare and there that the district concede that the jingles one map is sufficiently large and any measure whether use the any part black measure use the not hispanic deal jack d o j black measure it is above fifty percent the bright line bartlett versus strickland rule and population that's here you're not dealing with the coalition district you're dealing with people who sulfite if i is black and they have cited no court which would have required the district court to have used another category but they exist and on what is important going back to the remedial plan what is important is that the district court follow the guidance of louisiana officials in coming up with a remedial plan that was not an abuse of discretion in a day it looked at a district that in areas of a district that had already been combined by local officials for the parish council and noted that those did it made sense to them by black voters in that district because they are community of interest they share schools simply not the case that louisiana has subjugated the use of pure single member districts perhaps for trial courts in the wheezy and these are in use today and they have shown themselves to be able to a factually fair justice for black voter forth a premise that there must be diversity on the bench and certainly that is a possibility and it may be a does a rod i'm but usually small things start with one or two you know developments and then they mature on their own black voters in terrible respectfully judge jones have been raging for decades and they should not wait any more they have anything but my point i mean the judge didn't take into of the fellow the the judge respectfully and i'm running out of time i love to enter discussion question just briefly did not clearly hear and taking serious consideration of judge pickett selections election he followed supreme court precedent which recognize hundred and sixty one degrees you could have contested him in the easy and over twenty four year period no other black judge ran uncontested for majority white my district fine that's to his credit but you can't use that against the dis it relates to the last election cycle for judge two thousand and fourteen you have judge pickett who was a candidate who won you have his wife that is one of those tenets and lawyer and you have one other lady who ran for city court again no one has put themselves out there in the entire history of the court you have a black candidate that ran in the early ninety's i thought i thought i read something about that the history of th he could have ignored it he said give me the map he gives it to his staff they look at it it's noncontiguous they couldn't stop there they went further in trying to fix the map and when they did they said we can't do this district of twenty three dollars precincts which are traditional boundaries that are have to be considered over fourteen were split so it's very easy to draw a map if you don't comply with traditional really destroyed fourteen  some multiple ways and so that goes to the fact that you cannot satisfy jingles one went out printing a racial gerrymander and with regard to the remedy here if the legislature couldn't  should the court be able to draw them out maybe they should not have a different standard it still has to be constitutional in that with regard to leakage your honor the fact of the mater is that the where a minority lawyer says i ran in a sub district in moss and had i had an opportunity to run out marge i would have won so it is an issue that we will face time and time again linkage a substantial interest is recognized by rome wall that has to be considered and we ask that you reverse and dismiss the case