Navajo Nation v. San Juan County Updated Materials

Here:

441 – memorandum decision and order

441 – memorandum decision and order – exA

441 – memorandum decision and order – exB

441 – memorandum decision and order – exC

NYTs Profile of Indian Country Voting Rights Litigation

A must read!

Here is “For Native Americans, a ‘Historic Moment’ on the Path to Power at the Ballot Box.”

North Dakota Votings Rights Amended Complaint

Here is the amended complaint in Brakebill v. Jaeger (D.N.D.).

Special Master’s Final Report on Redistricting San Juan County

Here are the materials in the matter of Navajo Nation et al v. San Juan County et al, 12-cv-00039 (D. Utah):

Final Report of Bernard Grofman, Special Master

Link: Previous posts

NCAI Hearing on Indian Country Voting in the Great Lakes — Milwaukee, October 16, 2017

Here is the announcement:

great lakes voting rights hearing_oct 2017

Special Master Appointment in Navajo Nation v. San Juan County

On September 29, 2017, the Court in Navajo Nation v. San Juan County issued an order appointing Dr. Bernard Grofman, University of California, Irvine, to serve as Special Master and oversee redistricting of the County’s School Board and Commission election districts (past and current districting plans were found to have violated the Equal Protection Clause in three previous decisions). The Court also ordered San Juan County to pay the costs associated with the Special Master process. The Court laid out a remedial redistricting process that will allow it to establish new remedial redistricting plans by December, 2017, in time for the 2018 election cycle.

Here:

Order Appointing Special Master

Federal Court Orders San Juan County Voting Rights Suit to Trial

Here are the materials in Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission v. San Juan County (D. Utah):

93 Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims

99 Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims

106 Reply

141 County Motion for Summary J

144 Navajo Motion for Summary J

149 Navajo Opposition

151 County Opposition

154 County Reply

155 Navajo Reply

174 DCT Order Denying Summary Judgment

174 DCT Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims

Native American Voting Rights Coalition: Midwestern Voting Rights Hearing (9/5/2017)

Here (PDF):

NAVRC ND Hearing_Sept 2017

Federal Court Rejects San Juan County Remedial Maps, Orders Appointment of Special Master

Here is the order in Navajo Nation v. San Juan County (D. Utah):

397 DCT Opinion

An excerpt:

For the reasons below, San Juan County’s remedial plans fail to pass constitutional muster. Specifically, the court concludes race was the predominant factor in the development of District 3 of the School Board plan and Districts 1 and 2 of the County Commission plan. The County’s consideration of race requires strict scrutiny analysis of these districts. The court concludes the County has failed to satisfy strict scrutiny and, therefore, these districts are unconstitutional. The court will not adopt the County’s plans.

NARF Press Release on Presidential Commission on Voter Suppression

Saw this coming.

Here:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Friday, May 12, 2017

Contacts: Natalie Landreth, NARF Staff Attorney, (907) 276-0680; Matt Campbell, NARF Staff Attorney, (303) 447-8760

President Announces Commission to Investigate American Voters

Yesterday, the President announced the creation of the “Presidential Commission on Election Integrity,” a new body intended to investigate American voters for “improper” or “fraudulent” voting.  This is not only an unprecedented attack on the American electorate, it is also completely misleading because there is virtually no voter fraud anywhere in the United States.  Instead, the problems experienced by American voters are long lines, lack of polling places, lack of early voting opportunities, gerrymandered districts, and jurisdictions’ failure to follow voting laws such the Motor Voter bill and the language assistance provisions of the Voting Rights Act.  These problems are actually increasing in American elections, in large part due to the activities of people newly appointed to the Commission.  Prominent advocates of voter suppression such as Kris Kobach sit on this Commission.

“This Commission is completely backwards; it is not the American people who need to be investigated, it is the jurisdictions using more suppressive tactics to keep citizens from voting,” said Natalie Landreth staff attorney for the Native American Rights Fund and voting rights litigator. “Voter suppression is designed by those in power to keep themselves in power. They know as the electorate changes, their power wanes so these tactics are meant to ‘freeze the electorate’ in a way.”

The Native American Rights Fund (NARF) has litigated voting cases on behalf of American Indians and Alaska Natives since the 1980s, and it currently leads the Native American Voting Rights Coalition, a group of voting rights advocates who work in Indian Country across the United States.  In this capacity, NARF encounters a wide variety of problems faced by American Indian and Alaska Native voters.  These problems are many and widespread, but do not include voter fraud.

“North Dakota is a great example of how this narrative works,” said Staff Attorney Matt Campbell, who currently represents the plaintiffs in Brakebill v. Jaeger. “The state passed the strictest voter identification law in the country on the basis that they wanted to prevent voter fraud, but over the course of the case the state admitted there had never been a single case of fraud in North Dakota. It’s a myth, one designed to keep Native Americans and the elderly from voting.”

“It is ironic that this President purports to investigate election integrity since it is now known that he very likely benefitted from Russian interference in the November 2016 election,” said Landreth. “That is what needs to be investigated, not the American voters. And I want to be very clear about why the President is doing this: he is purporting to create a record that will surely form the basis for nationwide legislation to further suppress voting.”