Modesto today urged the U.S. Supreme Court to accept its bid to strike a 2002 state voting law, arguing that rejecting the city’s appeal would endanger local elections throughout California.
The city is defending itself against a 2004 lawsuit filed by three Latino residents who claim Modesto’s at-large City Council elections dilute their voting power.
They want the city to adopt district elections, which require candidates to live in specific neighborhoods.Modesto today argued that it should not be forced to make that change because of the lawsuit. The case hinges on the California Voting Rights Act, which the city contends is unconstitutional because it enables minorities to sue for election reforms solely on the basis of race.
On Sept. 11, lawyers for the Latino residents filed a petition with a court arguing that it’s too early for justices to hear the case.
Premium content for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
They said a pending advisory measure scheduled to appear on the November ballot could lead to the city adopting district elections, which would make the lawsuit irrelevant.
But the city countered that the advisory measure is not binding, and it would not strike the lawsuit’s impact on Modesto.
If the justices deny the city’s request, for example, the city likely would be forced to pay more than $1 million of legal fees incurred by the lawyers for the Latino residents.
The city’s “petition should not be denied merely because Modesto is exploring what it will do if the (Supreme Court) review is not granted,” wrote John McDermott, a Los Angeles attorney advising the city in the case.
Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Roger Beauchesne sided with the city in the lawsuit in 2005, but California’s 5th District Court of Appeal in Fresno upheld the law and overturned Beauchesne’s ruling in December. The state Supreme Court in March upheld the law by declining to hear the city’s appeal.