Singleton v. E. Baton Par. Sch. Bd.
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 22-489-JWD-EWD |
| Decision Date | 13 August 2022 |
| Citation | 621 F.Supp.3d 618 |
| Parties | Adeline René SINGLETON, et al. v. EAST BATON PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana |
Brian Francis Blackwell, James R. Bullman, Blackwell & Bullman, LLC, Baton Rouge, LA, for Adeline René Singleton, et al.
Alejandro R. Perkins, Ashley Unique Johnson, Evan M. Alvarez, Hammonds, Sills, Adkins & Guice, LLP, Baton Rouge, LA, for East Baton Rouge Parish School Board.
John Carroll Walsh, Baton Rouge, LA, Caroline M. Tomeny, Drew Donovan Lyons, Jeffrey K. Cody, Shows, Cali, Berthelot & Walsh, LLP, Baton Rouge, LA, for Doug Welborn.
Celia R. Cangelosi, Celia R. Cangelosi, Attorney at Law, Baton Rouge, LA, Connor Junkin, Wheelis & Rozanski APLC, Alexandria, LA, Michael C. Drew, Jones Walker LLP, New Orleans, LA, for R. Kyle Ardoin.
RULING AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 4) (the "Motion") filed by Plaintiffs, Adeline René Singleton, Christopher Kees, Sr., Tania Nyman, Dr. James C. Finney, Mary Anne "Boissiere" Lewis Leach, and Alvin Raetzsch (collectively, "Plaintiffs"). Plaintiffs have also submitted briefing in support of their motion. (Docs. 15, 18.) Defendant East Baton Rouge Parish School Board (the "School Board" or the "Board") opposes the motion. (Docs. 7, 14, 19.) Defendants Doug Welborn, in his official capacity as the Clerk of Court for East Baton Rouge Parish (the "Clerk of Court" or the "Clerk"), and R. Kyle Ardoin, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Louisiana (the "Secretary of State" or the "Secretary") also oppose the motion. (Docs. 13, 17.) An evidentiary hearing was scheduled for August 17, 2022, but that hearing is no longer necessary; the Court has thoroughly reviewed all evidence (including declarations) submitted in advance of the hearing. The Court has also carefully considered the law, the record as a whole, and the arguments and submissions of the parties and is prepared to rule. For the following reasons, the Motion is denied.
Plaintiffs in this action are registered voters in East Baton Rouge Parish (the "Parish") and residents of the geographic portions of the Parish governed by the School Board. (Pls.' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law ( ) ¶¶ II.A.1-7, Doc. 15; 1 Defendants in this action include the Board, the members of the Board in their individual and official capacities (the "Board Members"),2 the Clerk of Court for the Parish, and the Secretary of State. (Compl. ¶ 7, Doc. 1.)
Plaintiffs allege that elections to the School Board to be held in the fall of 2022 will be conducted pursuant to an apportionment plan adopted by the School Board in 2014 (the "2014 Apportionment Plan"). (Pls.' PFFCL ¶ I.2, Doc. 15 .) Plaintiffs claim that the use of the 2014 Apportionment Plan to conduct School Board elections in 2022 dilutes their votes in contravention of the "one person, one vote" guarantee of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Id. ¶ 1.3 .) Plaintiffs pray for an order enjoining the Secretary and Clerk from allowing any person to prepare a ballot for the November 8, 2022, School Board elections and from conducting those elections based on the 2014 Apportionment Plan pending an entry of a final judgment by this Court in this case. (Id. ¶ V.2.)
By way of background, in 2014, the School Board reapportioned itself into nine single-member election districts ("2014 Reapportionment Plan"). (Compl. ¶ 12, Doc. 1; Pls.' PFFCL ¶¶ III.A.4-5, Doc. 15.) Following the 2020 Federal Decennial Census, the Board began the reapportionment process, (Pls.' PFFCL ¶¶ III.B.1-3, Doc. 15), even though the Board is not required to reapportion itself until the end of 2023, (see Decl. of Sherri Wharton Hadskey, Louisiana Commissioner of Elections, ¶ 22, SOS Ex. 3 (citing La. R.S. 17:71.5(A)).)3
Several reapportionment plans were submitted for consideration by the School Board. (Pls.' PFFCL ¶ III.B.3, Doc. 15.) One of the plans submitted for consideration is known as the "Ware/Collins Plan 1-11," which provided for eleven School Board districts. (Id. ¶ III.B.4.) Another plan submitted for consideration is known as "Plan 22," which maintains a nine member School Board but changes the boundaries of the districts. (Id.) On May 5, 2022, the School Board adopted a resolution selecting Plan 22 as its reapportionment plan. (Id. ¶¶ III.B.12-13; Hadskey Decl. ¶ 24, SOS Ex. 3.)
On May 16, 2022, four plaintiffs, all of whom are Plaintiffs in this lawsuit, filed suit in the Louisiana 19th Judicial District Court against the School Board, the Clerk, and the Secretary seeking injunctive and declaratory relief. (Pet. for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief ("State Ct. Pet."), Board Ex. 1 at 1.) Specifically, these plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment against the School Board that the Plan 22 reapportionment plan adopted by the Board was null and void, and that the Ware/Collins Plan 1-11 was the sole reapportionment plan that may be considered by the Board. (Id. at 9.) The State Court Petition also sought to enjoin the School Board, the Clerk of Court and the Secretary from permitting any persons to qualify for an election, prepare any ballots, and/or conduct any election based on Plan 22. (Id. at 9-10.)
Following a hearing on June 13, 2022, the state trial court ruled on June 17, 2022, (a) that Plan 22 was "null and void"; (b) that the Secretary of State and Clerk of Court were "enjoined from using any ballots or any election information (including but not limited to maps, precincts, or election districts) that uses SB Public Plan 22 as a map of election districts for the upcoming November 8, 2022 election period"; and (c) that the Board must implement the Ware/Collins Plan 1-11 to be used in the School Board Election. Pet. for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Written Reason ( ), Board Ex. 3 at 2, 6-7.)
On June 20, 2022, the Board appealed the trial court's ruling to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal. (Board Exs. 4-7.) On June 24, 2022, the Board requested that the First Circuit stay the trial court's judgment pending the appeal. (Board Ex. 8.)
On June 30, 2022, the First Circuit granted the Board's request in part. (State First Circuit Stay Order, SOS Ex. 2.) Specifically, the appellate court stated:
We hereby deny the motion to stay to the extent it seeks to stay the preliminary injunction ruling issued by the district court in its June 17, 2022 ruling. However, we hereby stay the June 17, 2022 ruling in all other aspects pending further orders of this court, including the district court's order requiring the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board to "implement the nominated plan known as Ware/Collins 1-11" and submit the nominated plan to the Louisiana Secretary of State.
(Id.) Oral argument took place at the First Circuit on August 10, 2022. (Board Ex. 13.)
In light of the trial court judgment enjoining the use of Plan 22 and the First Circuit's stay of the order to implement the Ware/Collins Plan 1-11, the November 8, 2022, School Board primary election is currently underway using the 2014 Reapportionment Plan. (Hadskey Decl. ¶¶ 29-30, SOS Ex. 3.)
In sum, the First Circuit is being asked by the Plaintiffs to order the School Board to implement the Ware/Collins Plan 1-11 (as the district court ordered), and the School Board is asking the Louisiana First Circuit to allow it to proceed with Plan 22, as it previously voted to do. Thus, if the First Circuit grants either side their requested relief, then Plaintiffs' suit on the 2014 Reapportionment Plan which is presently before this Court is moot.
The School Board's primary election is November 8, 2022. (Hadskey Decl. ¶ 12, SOS Ex. 3.) This is the same day as the primary election for Congress. (Id. ¶¶ 12-16 (citing, inter alia, La. R.S. 17:402B(1)).) Early voting starts October 25, 2022. (Id. ¶ 40.) Absentee ballots must be mailed to the military and overseas voters by September 24, 2022. (Decl. of Stephen Raborn, Registrar of Voters, Parish of East Baton Rouge, ¶ 24, SOS Ex. 4 (citing La. R.S. 18:1308(A)(2)(a)); see also 52 U.S.C. 20302(a)(8)(A) ()). Thus, the August 17, 2022, hearing before this Court was scheduled to take place:
The Secretary and Clerk provide considerable evidence of the confusion, cost, and administrative burdens that will take place should the elections be delayed or canceled. These facts will be discussed in greater detail below.
Having carefully considered the matter, the Court will deny Plaintiffs' Motion on two main grounds. First, the Court will abstain under the Pullman abstention doctrine from deciding the federal constitutional questions posed to this Court. Resolving the constitutional issues is unnecessary given the fact that the state court could decide a matter of unsettled state law (namely, which School Board plan to use) and thus obviate the need for this Court to decide the federal constitutional question. At the very least, the state court action could present the federal constitutional issue in a different posture, which justifies...
To continue reading
Request your trial