Supreme Court pauses ruling that potentially weakens the Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court on Thursday put on hold, at least for now, a ruling by a federal appeals court that could limit the power of the Voting Rights Act. In a brief unsigned order, the justices agreed to pause a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit holding that private plaintiffs cannot rely on federal civil rights laws to bring claims under Section 2 of the VRA, which bars racial discrimination in voting. The 8th Circuit’s decision will remain blocked to give the plaintiffs in the case – two Native American tribes and several individual voters – time to file a petition for review of that ruling.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch indicated that they would have denied the plaintiffs’ request, thereby allowing the 8th Circuit’s decision to go into effect right away. As is common with cases that come to the court on its emergency docket, neither the majority nor the dissenters provided any explanation for their decisions.

The dispute is a challenge to a state legislative map, adopted in 2021, that eliminated two of the three legislative districts in the northeastern part of North Dakota in which Native American voters had the ability to elect their own candidates. The plaintiffs – the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and three Native American voters – contend that the 2021 map diluted the voting power of Native Americans, in violation of Section 2 of the VRA.

A federal judge in Fargo, North Dakota, agreed and ordered the state to suggest a new map; when the state failed to do so, he directed the state to adopt a map proposed by the plaintiffs, which led to the election of three Native American legislators in 2024.

North Dakota appealed to the 8th Circuit, which reversed. Two years earlier, the court of appeals had held in a separate decision that private plaintiffs cannot bring a lawsuit directly under Section 2. By a vote of 2-1, the court of appeals now held that private plaintiffs – such as the tribes and the Native American voters – cannot rely on federal civil rights laws to bring claims alleging violations of Section 2.

Two days before the 8th Circuit’s decision was slated to go into effect, the plaintiffs came to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to intervene. They contended that allowing the lower court’s ruling to remain in place would expose them to “irreparable harm if a decidedly unlawful map governs the 2026 election.” Moreover, they added, one of the voters who brought the lawsuit, Rep. Collette Brown, could become ineligible to serve if the 2021 map is restored because she does not live in that map’s version of her district.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh on July 16 issued an administrative stay – that is, an order that temporarily froze the 8th Circuit’s decision to give the court time to consider the plaintiffs’ request.

North Dakota urged the Supreme Court to “follow the normal course and allow the Eighth Circuit’s judgment to take effect unless and until” the court grants review “and has had the opportunity to fully consider the merits of” what it characterized as the 8th Circuit’s “rigorous analysis.”

But in a two-paragraph order on Thursday afternoon, the court declined to follow that suggestion. Instead, it stayed the lower court’s ruling until the plaintiffs can file, and the justices can consider, a petition for review of that ruling. If the court opts to rule on the merits of the case, Thursday’s order noted, the 8th Circuit’s decision will remain on hold until the Supreme Court issues its opinion in the case.