U.S. Supreme Court ruling could impact DPPJ lawsuit alleging gerrymandering

MANSFIELD, La. – A U.S. Supreme Court decision on Wednesday that could affect redistricting across country is expected to trickle down to DeSoto Parish, where a lawsuit has been on hold since last fall.

A group of DeSoto Parish voters sued the DeSoto Parish Police Jury in federal court in May 2023, alleging it gerrymandered new election district lines based on race. The lines of the 11 police juror districts were redrawn in response to the 2020 census.

The plaintiffs wanted to stop the fall 2023 election, but a federal judge allowed it to continue. However, he left open the possibility of a trial based on their claims.

In September, U.S. District Judge Jerry Edwards Jr. granted the plaintiffs’ request to put the lawsuit on hold until the U.S. Supreme Court issues its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. Edwards also said the plaintiffs “shall” notify him within 10 days of the Supreme Court’s decision.

Attempts to reach attorneys representing the plaintiffs and Police Jury were not immediately successful Wednesday.

Police Jury Administrator Michael Norton told KTBS he has talked with their attorneys in Baton Rouge. He’s asked them to make plans to attend an executive session that will be planned in the upcoming weeks so they can advise police jurors on their next course of action in response to the Supreme Court's ruling.

The plaintiffs contend when the Police Jury drew its new lines it did not take into consideration the vast growth in north DeSoto Parish. Instead, the plan retained five majority-Black districts in Mansfield, which has lost considerable population, according to the 2020 census count. The population has declined even more since then.

The Police Jury’s demographer disagreed and said the plan selected for the new districts met the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. 

The plaintiffs have made several attempts to settle the lawsuit, hoping the Police Jury would agree to redraw the lines. But all offers have been rejected.  

In September, in response to Edwards’ order delaying the lawsuit, the Police Jury’s legal team of Breazeale, Sachse & Wilson said it did not oppose the plaintiff’s motion, but offered two caveats.

First, the attorneys said if the Supreme Court’s ruling takes longer than expected then they wanted to reserve the right to file a motion to lift the stay so the case could be tried in sufficient time to allow the 2027 state elections to be held as scheduled.

Second, the Police Jury’s attorneys took issue with the impact the Supreme Court ruling would have on DeSoto’s case.

 “While the Callais case may be informative, it will not be dispositive of the issues in this case. The defendants developed a plan based on the 2020 census relating to the districts of the DeSoto Parish Police Jury grounded in multiple considerations well beyond Title 2 of the Voting Rights Act, such as compactness, contiguity, respect for political subdivisions or communities defined by actual shared interests, incumbency protection and political affiliation. Indeed, the plan as it exists now, like the 2010 and 2000 plans, had six majority white districts and five minority black districts. This is not an example of race being a material factor, let alone a predominant one, but simple common sense based on demographic principles,” the attorneys wrote, adding, “Accordingly, defendants believe a stay pending the U.S. Supreme Court decision … is appropriate, but this is not an acquiescence that the Supreme Court decision may impact, from a substantive standpoint, the issues before this court.”