St. Paul, MN — The Spirit Lake Tribe, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, and several individual voters today filed an en banc petition urging the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to reconsider a recent decision that stripped voters of their right to enforce the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The panel’s ruling, if allowed to stand, would silence Native voters in North Dakota and disenfranchise millions across seven Midwestern states.

The unprecedented decision held that private citizens may no longer bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the VRA — a key provision used for decades to combat racially discriminatory voting laws — claiming the law does not create individual rights. The ruling is at odds with Supreme Court precedent and undermines hard-fought victories by Native communities.

“The fair map we secured led to a historic first – a Spirit Lake Nation member elected to the North Dakota legislature. This decision threatens that progress and weakens our voice in state government,” said Spirit Lake Nation Chairperson Lonna Jackson-Street.

“Turtle Mountain fought hard for a fair and legal map. When the state draws unlawful districts, Courts must step in to protect voters — not pave the way for injustice. We will continue to fight for fair representation,” said Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians Chairman Jamie Azure.

"We went to court because the map the state passed made it harder for Native voters like me to have a real voice. The court agreed and gave us a fair chance to elect candidates. Now, the Eighth Circuit wants to take away my right to question maps that silence votes, not because we were wrong, but because they say the Voting Rights Act does not create rights. That’s not justice and we’re going to keep fighting for that,” said plaintiff and North Dakota Native Vote Board Member Wes Davis (Turtle Mountain Chippewa).

“Throughout the redistricting process, we asked to be fairly represented. When the state adopted an unfair and illegal map, we challenged it — and we won. But now, the Eighth Circuit has erased that victory on a legal technicality that goes against decades of settled law. I will continue to stand with my community and demand fair representation in our legislature,” said plaintiff Collette Brown, North Dakota Representative for District 9.

“I joined this case because I saw firsthand how the state’s map silenced Native voters in our community. It split us up in ways that made it nearly impossible to elect people who understand our lives and will stand up for our interests. The lower court agreed and fixed that. Now the Eighth Circuit has reversed that progress. The court says that we never had the right to challenge it in the first place and that no North Dakota voter has that right anymore. That’s not just disappointing — it’s dangerous. Native voices matter, and we’re not done fighting to make sure they’re heard,” said plaintiff Zachery S. King (Turtle Mountain Chippewa).

Campaign Legal Center (CLC), Native American Rights Fund (NARF), Robins Kaplan, LLP, and the Law Office of Bryan L. Sells, LLC — on behalf of Native American voters on the Turtle Mountain Reservation and Spirit Lake Reservation in North Dakota — filed the en banc petition arguing Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act/Klan Act of 1871 is and must remain a means to enforce the voting guarantees of Section 2 in every state of the nation. The current disputed map dilutes the voting power of North Dakota’s Native American voters.

“Two weeks ago, two Eighth Circuit judges ruled that the Voting Rights Act does not create voting rights enforceable by voters in court. The full Eighth Circuit should overturn that radical and unlawful ruling, which flouts Supreme Court precedent and congressional intent. Voters in the seven states of the Eighth Circuit — including Native American voters in North Dakota — should not be afforded fewer voting rights than those in the rest of the country,” said Mark Gaber, senior director of redistricting at CLC. “Campaign Legal Center and our partners have been in this fight for over three years, and we will see to it that Native American voters from the Turtle Mountain Band and Spirit Lake Tribe are able to make their voices heard and achieve fair representation without deliberate barriers.”

“This decision is a devastating blow to Native voters and to the Voting Rights Act itself. For decades, private citizens — especially in communities like Turtle Mountain and Spirit Lake — have relied on Section 2 to challenge racially discriminatory voting laws. The Eighth Circuit has now become the only federal appellate court to block those claims from being heard. It’s a dangerous precedent that denies voters across seven states the right to defend their most fundamental freedoms. We’re not backing down. NARF will continue to fight to ensure that Native people can have a voice in the political process,” said NARF Staff Attorney Lenny Powell.

If this decision stands, only the U.S. Department of Justice is authorized by the VRA to file lawsuits in the Eighth Circuit, which effectively closes off voters’ ability to challenge unfair maps as the department diminishes its Civil Rights Division. Native American voters in North Dakota have been fighting for a fair map since 2021. If this decision is left in place, their right to fair representation could vanish overnight.

###

The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center advances democracy through law. We safeguard the freedom to vote, defend voters’ right to know who is spending money to influence elections, and work to ensure public trust in our elected officials.

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email, tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded, and join our livestreamed events. 

Bruce V. Spiva, senior vice president of Campaign Legal Center, issued the following statement: 

"By refusing to answer basic questions about the nature of their organization, the U.S. DOGE Service (DOGE) is diminishing trust across our government.

"The Freedom of Information Act allows the American people full visibility into how the government operates. The government’s argument — that it may essentially choose which aspects of the federal government are subject to transparency laws — would erode the transparency at the heart of a healthy democracy. It would incentivize presidents to create more entities like DOGE that can operate in a black box and avoid transparency laws.

"To preserve public trust, the U.S. Supreme Court must uphold the D.C. District Court’s ruling and compel DOGE to answer questions from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) about their government activities."

This week, the U.S. House of Representatives plans to vote on a budget reconciliation package containing provisions that could seriously undermine our democracy. Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and former Republican chairman of the Federal Election Commission, released the following statement: 

“The House is trying to use budget reconciliation as a Trojan horse to enact President Trump’s agenda across our government while avoiding the Senate filibuster rules — in doing so, they are poised to severely undermine our democracy. 

“In one provision, Congress aims to ban the enforcement of state or local laws regulating artificial intelligence (AI) — even those designed to stop election manipulation. More than 20 states have already created such laws after seeing that bad actors can use AI to create fake content that could mislead voters or discourage electoral participation. Congress should be following the example set by these states. We need federal laws that address the challenges AI can create for our democracy, rather than setting voters up to face a deluge of false information and denying their right to make informed decisions at the ballot box. 

“In another provision, Congress aims to shield the Trump administration, and any government actor, from accountability when they break the law. This outrageous change would undermine the rule of law and allow government officials, including the president, to escape the possibility of being held in contempt of court if they violate court orders. The provision would even apply to court orders and injunctions issued before this law takes effect. In essence, the provision could in a single stroke render thousands of prior orders across the country unenforceable via contempt proceedings. The rule of law in our country would be dangerously undermined if this provision becomes law. 

“CLC urges the House to remove these harmful provisions from its legislation. If they remain in place, we urge every lawmaker to vote NO and defeat this budget reconciliation package to protect our democracy.”

CLC, a nonpartisan nonprofit focused on advancing democracy through law, has identified two provisions that would harm voters and threaten the rule of law. 

The first — SEC. 43201(c) — is a 10-year ban on the enforcement of all state and local laws that regulate artificial intelligence (AI), which would include rules for AI’s use in political campaigns and elections. The second — SEC. 70302 — would severely restrict federal courts’ authority to hold government officials in contempt if they violate judicial orders. The bill would require those suing the government to pay a bond before the court can use its contempt power to enforce injunctions or restraining orders against illegal actions.

###

The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center advances democracy through law. We safeguard the freedom to vote, defend voters’ right to know who is spending money to influence elections, and work to ensure public trust in our elected officials.

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email, tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded, and join our livestreamed events. 

Baton Rouge, LA — Today, a coalition of voting rights groups is suing the state of Louisiana for a blatant violation of Louisianans’ freedom to vote. The state passed a proof of citizenship law that is unconstitutionally vague and violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). If implemented, the law will disproportionately harm voters of color, women, new voters, voters with past felony convictions, and other historically disenfranchised communities. 

The League of Women Voters of Louisiana (LWVLA), Voice of the Experienced (VOTE), the NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity and Justice (PCEJ) filed suit to ensure all eligible Louisiana voters can make their voices heard without being burdened by potentially onerous voter registration requirements. The groups are represented by Campaign Legal Center (CLC), Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers’ Committee), and Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). 

“SB 436, which places unnecessary barriers to Louisianans’ ability to register to vote, is not only confusing, but is also illegal,” said M. Christian Green, president of the League of Women Voters of Louisiana. “Furthermore, the law unlawfully restricts the League of Women Voters of Louisiana’s ability to do our core nonpartisan work of registering and educating voters. At the end of the day, educating voters is our mission — policing citizenship is not. This law takes Louisiana in the wrong direction, and we look forward to challenging it in court.” 

“SB 436 is a solution in search of a problem — one that will make registering to vote harder or impossible for tens of thousands of Louisiana voters,” said Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters of the US. “Voter registration should be a simple and accessible process, yet across the country, the League is fighting bills and laws that seek to make it harder for Americans, particularly women and voters of color, to register to vote. We are proud that wherever you see these unlawful documentary proof of citizenship bills, you see the League fighting back.” 

“We are deeply concerned about SB 436 and the impact it will have on our members, and all Louisianans, when registering to vote,” said Dr. Michael McClanahan, president of the NAACP Louisiana State Conference. “By making voter registration harder, it deliberately undermines the right to vote for countless individuals in our community. The Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP stands against any attempt to disenfranchise voters and stands committed to ensuring that every eligible voter has the opportunity to participate in our democracy.” 

“This law is an attempt to suppress the voices of Black voters and other communities of color under the false pretense of protecting election integrity. It is dangerously vague, unconstitutional, and in clear violation of the National Voter Registration Act. Rather than addressing real challenges facing our democracy, this policy creates confusion, fear, and unnecessary barriers for eligible voters—particularly those who have historically been pushed to the margins. Louisiana should be working to expand access to the ballot, not entrenching new forms of voter suppression. We joined this lawsuit because our communities deserve fairness, and the full protection of their rights,” said Ashley Shelton, Founder/CEO of Power Coalition for Equity and Justice (PCEJ). 

“This law has nothing to do with voter integrity — it’s about voter suppression. If you’re a returning citizen without SB 436's unnecessary documentation, you’re being forced to spend money just to prove to the government what it already knows: that you have the right to vote. That’s a modern-day poll tax, plain and simple — and it needs to be taken off the books,” said Alfred Marshall, organizer for Voice of the Experienced. 

“SB 436 threatens to silence countless voters across the state by potentially forcing them to jump through new, burdensome and unnecessary hoops when registering to vote,” said Danielle Lang, senior director of voting rights at Campaign Legal Center. “Campaign Legal Center — alongside our coalition partners — will continue to fight for the freedom to vote for everyday Louisianans.” 

“Many eligible citizens lack the necessary documentation to prove their citizenship and will be barred from accessing the ballot box. This law is a useless solution in search of a nonexistent problem, and it does nothing but block eligible voters from participating in our democracy,” said Javon Davis, associate counsel for the Voting Rights Project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “The requirements especially harm Black people and other communities of color—groups who already face barriers to voting. We are filing this lawsuit to protect the fundamental right to vote in Louisiana and ensure that no eligible citizen is silenced by unnecessary red tape.” 

“Registering to vote should be simple and free from unnecessary barriers, but Louisiana’s SB 436 unlawfully complicates the process,” said Ahmed Soussi, Senior Staff Attorney at the Southern Poverty Law Center. “SPLC is proud to represent the plaintiffs in this fight to protect our fundamental right to vote.”

Follow the latest updates on this matter through our case page.  

### 

Campaign Legal Center is a nonpartisan legal organization dedicated to solving the wide range of challenges facing American democracy. Founded in 2002, CLC fights for every American’s freedom to vote and participate meaningfully in the democratic process. 

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email, tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded, and join our livestreamed events.