Quick Read
- The Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling that restricted private lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act.
- Native American tribes in North Dakota claim the state’s redistricting maps dilute their voting power.
- The case may reshape how voting rights discrimination cases are litigated in the future.
- The 8th Circuit ruling contradicted decades of precedent allowing private lawsuits under the VRA.
- The Supreme Court could fully hear the case by 2026.
The Supreme Court took a pivotal step on Thursday, July 24, 2025, by temporarily halting a federal appeals court ruling that could have significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act (VRA), a cornerstone of U.S. civil rights law for the past six decades. The case, originating in North Dakota, involves Native American tribes who argue that state redistricting maps dilute their voting power. This decision has far-reaching implications for voting rights and the ability of private citizens to challenge discriminatory election practices.
Background of the Case
The lawsuit, brought by the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians and the Spirit Lake Tribe, centers on North Dakota’s 2021 legislative redistricting map. The tribes allege that the new map dilutes the voting power of Native American communities, preventing them from electing candidates who represent their interests. According to Axios, the tribes filed their lawsuit in 2022 under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate based on race or color.
A district court initially sided with the tribes, ruling that the state’s redistricting maps violated Section 2. This led to the election of three Native American legislators in 2024, a notable shift in the Republican-dominated legislature. However, in May 2025, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the district court’s decision, asserting that only the federal government—not private citizens or organizations—can bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the VRA.
The Supreme Court’s Temporary Block
The Supreme Court’s unsigned order temporarily halts the 8th Circuit’s ruling, allowing the tribes to continue their legal fight. While the court did not provide a detailed explanation for its decision, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented, favoring the appeals court’s ruling. This temporary block is seen as a victory for Native American groups and civil rights organizations, who argue that the 8th Circuit’s decision undermines decades of legal precedent.
According to The Daily Record, more than 90% of Section 2 cases historically have been brought by private individuals or organizations. Richard Hasen, a law professor at UCLA, noted that the 8th Circuit’s ruling conflicts with decisions from other appellate courts, which have upheld the rights of private entities to sue under the VRA. This discrepancy among courts often prompts Supreme Court intervention.
Implications for Native American and Minority Voting Rights
The case highlights broader concerns about voter suppression and racial discrimination in the United States. Native American leaders argue that systemic barriers, such as lack of traditional addresses and limited access to polling places, continue to disenfranchise Indigenous voters. Recent state-level laws in Arizona and Montana, which restrict ballot collection and impose address requirements, exacerbate these challenges, according to Axios.
In a statement, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians Chairman Jamie Azure expressed relief at the Supreme Court’s decision, stating, “Our fight for the rights of our citizens continues. The map enacted by the North Dakota legislature unlawfully dilutes the votes of Native voters, and it cannot be allowed to stand.”
North Dakota Secretary of State Michael Howe, a Republican named in the lawsuit, responded by affirming his office’s commitment to following election laws as determined by the courts.
Broader Context and Future Outlook
The Supreme Court’s decision comes just weeks before the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, signed into law in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The VRA was a landmark achievement of the civil rights movement, aimed at combating racial discrimination in voting. Since its enactment, the number of Black and Native American elected officials has significantly increased. However, critics argue that recent legal and legislative changes threaten to erode these gains.
The case will likely return to the Supreme Court for a full hearing in 2026. If the court ultimately upholds the 8th Circuit’s ruling, it could drastically limit the ability of private citizens and organizations to challenge discriminatory voting practices, leaving enforcement solely in the hands of the federal government. This shift would occur against the backdrop of reduced civil rights enforcement by the Department of Justice, as noted by Axios.
In addition to the North Dakota case, the Supreme Court is also considering a separate redistricting case in Louisiana, involving the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district. Both cases underscore the ongoing debates about race, representation, and the role of federal courts in safeguarding voting rights.
As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes remain high for minority communities and the future of voting rights protections in the United States.