Amicus Briefs Published October 6, 2025

Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe — Voting Rights Act (ND)

Supreme Court of the United States

Issue Areas
  • Election Protection
In This Resource
Summary

In February 2022, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and three Native American voters filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging North Dakota’s state legislative districts signed into law in 2021. The plaintiffs argued that the new districts diluted the voting power of Native Americans in the state, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA).

The case went to trial in June 2023. That November, a federal judge ruled that the districts discriminated against Native American voters and ordered the state legislature to replace the map with one compliant with the VRA.

North Dakota Secretary of State Michael Howe appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, arguing that the 2021 redistricting did not dilute the votes of Native Americans. Howe also argued that individual voters don’t have the right to sue the state.

In May 2025, the appeals court ruled in Howe’s favor, holding that private parties—as opposed to the U.S. Attorney General—do not have the ability to sue to protect their Section 2 rights under federal law. The Eighth Circuit is the only circuit court in the country to hold that private individuals cannot sue under Section 2.

In July, following an emergency request by the tribes and voters, the U.S. Supreme Court paused the Eighth Circuit decision. In September, the tribes and voters asked the justices to hear the case on its merits.

Latest update

On Oct. 6, 2025, a group of four former Republican governors—Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Gov. Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, Gov. Marc Racicot of Montana, and Gov. William F. Weld of Massachusetts—filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the ability of private individuals and groups to sue under Section 2 of the VRA is essential to protecting the right to vote and fair representation. The governors, represented by States United and the law firm Hogan Lovells, argue that Congress intended for private parties to be able to enforce Section 2, and that the appeals court decision barring such lawsuits goes against decades of VRA litigation.

The governors wrote that they “believe that ensuring fair representation is one of the central pillars of our democracy, and that private enforcement of Section 2 is essential to maintaining that pillar.”

“In fact, every case that this Court has decided under the current text of Section 2 was brought by private plaintiffs,” they wrote.

Related documents
Related news