(The Center Square) — A lawsuit against an upstate New York town alleging voter discrimination will be allowed to proceed after the state’s highest court quashed an effort to strike down a key section of election law.
The unanimous ruling by the state Court of Appeals rejected a legal challenge from the town of Newburgh, after determining that the Orange County community north of New York City did not have standing to challenge the vote-dilution provisions in the New York Voting Rights Act, a 2022 law meant to protect the electoral power of minority voters.
The decision upholds a previous Appellate Division ruling that allowed a lawsuit filed by a group of Newburgh voters who allege the town’s election system disenfranchises Black and Hispanic residents.
“This is a critical win for voting rights in New York,” said attorney David Imamura, a partner at Abrams Fensterman law firm, which is representing the Newburgh voters in the lawsuit along with the Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School. “At a time when states across the country are weakening safeguards against vote dilution, New York’s highest court has decisively rejected a baseless effort to undermine a law that protects every voter’s equal access to the democratic process.”
The law, also known as the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act after the late civil rights activist and Georgia congressman, was approved by the New York State Legislature in 2022. Democrats who pushed the bill through the Legislature said it seeks to restore the “preclearance” gutted from the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
State law mandates that counties, cities, towns or school districts with a record of discrimination in New York must seek approval from state election officials before approving major changes to local voting laws that could impact Blacks, Hispanics and other racial minorities.
In March, a group of advocates sued Newburgh, alleging that the town’s use of an at-large method for electing the members of the Town Board violated the Voting Rights Act law “by diluting the votes of Hispanic and African-American voters.”
The lawsuit noted that the town has never elected an African American or Hispanic candidate to the council, despite the fact that they represent 14.6% and 23.6% of the its population, respectively.
The state Supreme Court ruled last year that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits a state from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Because federal voting laws preempt state laws, the lower court was forced to strike down the voting law in its entirety. However, the appellate panel overturned that ruling after determining that the judge, Justice Maria Vazquez-Doles, lacked the authority to invalidate the remaining portions of the Voting Rights Act.
