Fact Check: North Dakota ruling could eliminate key tool for enforcing minority voting rights.

Fact Check: North Dakota ruling could eliminate key tool for enforcing minority voting rights

What We Know

A recent ruling by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has significant implications for minority voting rights enforcement in North Dakota and six other states. The court's decision, issued on May 14, 2025, concluded that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) cannot be enforced through lawsuits by private parties under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. This ruling affects the ability of individuals and groups to challenge discriminatory voting practices in court, which has historically been a crucial mechanism for protecting minority voters (Eighth Circuit, NPR).

The case arose from a challenge by the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians and the Spirit Lake Tribe regarding North Dakota's redistricting plan, which they argued diluted their voting power. The Eighth Circuit's ruling indicates that only the federal government can enforce Section 2 of the VRA, effectively removing a vital tool for private enforcement that has been used for decades (NPR, North Dakota Monitor).

Analysis

The Eighth Circuit's decision has been met with significant criticism from voting rights advocates. Chief Circuit Judge Steven Colloton, in his dissent, highlighted the long-standing practice of private enforcement of Section 2, noting that over 400 actions have been brought by private plaintiffs since 1982. He argued that the majority's ruling disregards this history and undermines the protections intended by the VRA (NPR, North Dakota Monitor).

The ruling has been described as a setback for Native American voters, as it limits their ability to contest electoral maps that they believe are racially discriminatory. The implications of this ruling extend beyond North Dakota, affecting voters in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota, where similar challenges may now face greater hurdles (Campaign Legal Center).

The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is high. NPR and the North Dakota Monitor are reputable news organizations that provide in-depth coverage of legal and political issues. The Eighth Circuit's official ruling is a primary source that provides the legal basis for the court's decision. The dissenting opinion from Judge Colloton adds a critical perspective that highlights the potential consequences of the ruling (Eighth Circuit, NPR, North Dakota Monitor).

Conclusion

The claim that the North Dakota ruling could eliminate a key tool for enforcing minority voting rights is True. The Eighth Circuit's decision restricts the ability of private individuals and groups to bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which has historically been a vital mechanism for challenging discriminatory voting practices. This ruling not only impacts North Dakota but also sets a precedent that could affect minority voting rights enforcement across several states.

Sources

1. Eighth Circuit
2. Tribes appeal 8th Circuit panel ruling on Voting Rights Act
3. 美国各州名称及缩写 - 百度知道
4. N、S、E、W分别代表什么方位？_百度知道
5. Appeals court rules against North Dakota tribes in voting rights case
6. 北卡罗莱纳州（North Carolina）在美国是怎样的存在 ...
7. Voters in Seven States Lose Right to Fight for Fair Representation
8. 美国所有的州的缩写 - 百度知道