Document: 500 U.S. 646 111 S.Ct. 2096 114 L.Ed.2d 691 Janice G. CLARK, et al., Appellantsv.Charles "Buddy" ROEMER, Governor of Louisiana, al. No. 90-952. Argued April 22, 1991. Decided June 3, Syllabus Section 5 the Voting Rights Act 1965 requires covered jurisdictions to obtain either judicial preclearance from United States District Court for Columbia or administrative Attorney General before implementing new voting practices, in order prevent changes that have a discriminatory purpose effect. Appellants, black registered voters and rights organization filed suit Court, challenging validity Louisiana's electoral scheme certain judges under, inter alia, § 5. In response their 1987 amended complaint alleging number statutory constitutional changes, many which were adopted late 1960's 1970's, had not been precleared under 5, Louisiana submitted all unprecleared preclearance. 1990, after objected some including creation several judgeships, asked him reconsider proceeded with plans hold fall elections seats. The denied appellants' motion enjoin seats, but enjoined winners taking office pending its further orders. October, court, noting judgeships now districts where State obtained later-created ruled earlier when he later, related, changes. court also refused those it found subject valid objections by violated holding could take office, Held: 1. erred enjoining interposed objections. Without it, change will be effective as law, Connor v. Waller, 421 656, 95 2003, 44 486, is unenforceable, Hathorn Lovorn, 457 255, 269, 102 2421, 2430, 72 824. Moreover, plaintiffs are entitled an injunction prohibiting precleared, Allen Bd. Elections, 393 544, 572, 89 817, 835, 22 court's reasons refusing lack merit. Appellants displayed no diligence elections, every participant process knew over three years challenged seats unprecleared. Nor was 5's applicability uncertain until since this issued summary affirmance decision applied 1986, Haith Martin, 618 F.Supp. 410, aff'd mem., 477 901, 106 3268, 91 559. concern about potential voter confusion low turnout special election did justify position, may more confused inclined avoid polls held conceded violation federal law. stated possible challenges civil criminal judgments counsels favor illegal thus averting challenge state judgments. This Court's decisions dealing ex post question whether set aside see, e.g., Perkins Matthews, 400 379, 431, 27 476, inapposite instant case, addresses ante allow at all. And necessary decide here there instances deny go forward. Pp. 652-655. 2. State's failure preclear cured General's McCain Lybrand, 465 236, 104 1037, 79 271, made clear submission legislation defines request's scope. Normally, pertains only identified legislation, any ambiguity scope must resolved against submitting authority. A submission's description one another particular district does not, itself, constitute prior incorporated newly statute. requirement identify each perform his duties, otherwise would add redoubtable obligations additional duty research ensure unsubmitted brought. Here, submissions contemporary failed matter law put on notice included. 655-659. 3. Appellants' request removed proper consider first instance. 659-660. 751 586 (M.D.La.1990), reversed remanded. KENNEDY, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Robert B. McDuff, appellants. James A. Feldman, U.S., amicus curiae, supporting appellants, leave Pugh, Jr., appellees. Justice KENNEDY 1 case raises two issues 1965, Stat. 439, amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973c. 2 * 1973 seq., contains major provisions governing discrimination practices. existing procedures. It prohibits procedures "resul[t] denial abridgement right citizen vote account race color. . ." 1973(a). governs effect, jurisdictions, such methods Through preclearance, jurisdiction declaratory judgment "does effect denying abridging color." Ibid. submit States. If "has objection within sixty days submission," enforce change. 3 Louisiana. They 1986 §§ Act, multimember, large appellate, district, family judges. Under 2, appellants alleged diluted minority strength. July 1987, failing them 1970's. portion assigned single Judge; allegations heard three-judge 1973c; 28 2284. 4 allegations, September 1988 May 1989, granted others. On 18 20, these 1990. 23, petitioners asking August 15, presiding 11 determined Some issue case. 28, blocked injunction. panel, however, winning candidates 6 Also Appeals Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, representatives purposes Act. League Latin American Citizens Council 4434 Clements, 914 F.2d 620 (1990), cert. granted, 498 ----, 775, 112 838 (1991). Based precedent, Judge aspect dissolved October ordered November December 8, same day, again As then, scheduled 7 31 opinion, final pronouncement status judgeships. divided into categories. Category involved at-large where, most part, that, despite current objections, For example, First Judicial Caddo Parish has called Divisions, approval Divisions E (created 1966, 1986), G 1976), H 1978), I 1982). Division F created 1973; rather, 1988. held, G, H, I, F. reasoned because creating added Parish, F, constituted 586, 592, n. 35 (M.D.La.1990) 8 ruling General. Yet elections. "the harm citizens [from injunction] outweigh[ed] harm, if any, allowing continue." Id., 595. allowed proceed following conditions. if, 90 days, action persuaded withdraw remain retain remainder terms installed 150 9 29, emergency application appeal. we part uncleared. Clark Roemer, 376, 390, modified, 399, 391 (1990). We overturn refusal considered implication. 10 January 18, 1991, noted probable jurisdiction. 838. next sought That still Columbia. II presents discrete First, Second, determine 12 Nonetheless, permitted forward resolution request. error. 13 "will la[w] unless cleared" pursuant methods. 486 (1975) (per curiam). See Board Supervisors Warren County, 429 642, 645, 97 833, 834, 51 (1977) ("No practice procedure enforced political subdivision succeeded declined object"). Failure "renders unenforceable." 824 (1982). (1969). 14 ignored principles altogether. presented election, none find persuasive. cited short time between day recent injunction, fact qualifying absentee begun, expense candidates. But parties, violations complaint. When reconsideration original became apparent intended year. Less than month months 6, unprecleared, 15 other merit well. maintained our Brooks Georgia 1989 WL 180759, 288, 243 410 (EDNC 1985), 559 (1986), vague concerns Voters Finally, invalid place. To contrary, 16 F.Supp., 595, give provisional conducted "closely parallel[ed]" decisions, 476 (1971), NAACP Hampton County Election Commission, 470 166, 105 1128, 84 124 (1985), Berry Doles, 438 190, 98 2692, 57 693 (1978), States, 411 526, 93 1702, 36 472 (1973). cases inapposite. "[i]n circumstances might appropriate enter affording local officials opportunity seek ordering fail do so required forthcoming." 396-397, S.Ct., 441. Perkins, Berry, Georgia, already; remove elected individuals Here face elections; faced premises, prohibition implementation election. especially true because, unlike circumstance 17 need today plaintiff's seat An extreme present seat's drawn attention eve equitable proceed. No exigency exists here. received official defect yet later file "basic mechanism" Sheffield Comm'rs, 435 110, 136, 965, 981, 55 148 (1978). 1990 even short, consistency mandate should B operated districts, though objects conflicts 271 (1984), subverts efficacy 19 1966 South Carolina statute establishing three-member county council requiring reside run residency districts. 1971, increase members five, information, copy interpose "to question." 241, 1041. information indicated approved aspects 1971 amendments, effected alternative, Amendment retained 20 both holdings. normal circumstances, legislation. 251, 257, 1046, 1049. established Applying standards, finding course approving amendment clearly erroneous, limited amendments. 21 determining explained mandated focus entirely practices," id., "submission encompass changes—precleared not—that Act's date .," 26, 1048, 26. "When adopts makes defined sending merely general constitutes enactment cannot deemed previous themselves independently preclearance." 256, 23 follows changes: 24 "[W]e express positions forth Part order. language various acts General, well letters seeking support conclusion. Thus, Amendment, entire act passed legislature. approves act, necessarily older, reenacted forms act. provides positions, include reach number." 592-593 (footnotes omitted). 25 footnote, Acts "in letter expressly states being increased another." 592-593, 38. basis alone, distinguished McCain. 26 explanation replicates precise factual legal errors Its "not act" inconsistent establishes presumption review practices "A fails ones adequate latter practices." 256-257, Of course, specific along specificity wishes consider. duties substantial responsibilities represents us reviews average 17,000 year, 60-day period, analyze demographics, patterns, conditions make concerning presence Brief Amicus Curiae 18. Congress recognized addition monitor "[B]ecause acknowledged anticipated inability Department—given resources—to investigate respect enacted subdivisions Act," 247, 1044-1045, condition identify, submit, receive upsets already brought light. Such rule diminish jurisdictions' self-monitoring create incentives forgo reaffirm rejecting vision light errors, "expressly approved" uncleared stand. Neither initial nor upon can None informed transmitted instances, containing record five letters, communications requisite notice. Two mere cover nothing note District, explained, alone "any request" construed jurisdiction, 1050, "we left definite firm conviction," 258, gave 29 office. "[A] better position fashion relief, 'is familiar nuances situation' hear evidence." 270, 2431, quoting 397, fashioning decree granting adopt remedy implements practicable manner least offense provisions. 30 reversed, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. ordered.

Category: 1