Voters and key voting rights groups filed multiple lawsuits against Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana on Friday over his order to suspend the state\u2019s House primary, arguing that he had overstepped his executive powers by delaying the election to give lawmakers time to draw a new congressional map.<\/p>\n
The state court rejected the pleas by the groups for an emergency order to immediately block the governor from suspending the primary, and scheduled a preliminary hearing for next week. With early in-person voting set to begin on Saturday, the legal action could further upend Louisiana\u2019s rapidly shifting election calendar amid a dizzying series of developments since the Supreme Court rejected Louisiana\u2019s map as an illegal racial gerrymander<\/a>.<\/p>\n On Thursday, Mr. Landry suspended the state\u2019s congressional primary election<\/a> under the governor\u2019s emergency powers, saying that the existing map was no longer legal to use and that the Legislature needed time to craft new district lines.<\/p>\n \u201cI think it\u2019s fairly described as dramatic, where the governor is trying to change the election on Thursday, when early voting starts on Saturday,\u201d said Sarah Brannon, a deputy director of the A.C.L.U.\u2019s Voting Rights Project, which is representing the plaintiffs in the case.<\/p>\n The remaining races, including a highly competitive Senate primary, will continue as scheduled on May 16, with early voting set to proceed on Saturday. Secretary of State Nancy Landry, who is not related to the governor, said House races would remain on ballots, but votes cast for those primaries would not be counted.<\/p>\n Voting rights groups on Friday argued that the Supreme Court ruling did not qualify as an emergency under Louisiana law. Given that absentee ballots have already been requested and voters are already struggling to navigate a new closed-primary system, the groups warned against sowing further chaos and jeopardizing people\u2019s right to vote.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is no threat to the safety of any voter as a result of the Supreme Court\u2019s decision,\u201d the lawsuit states. \u201cThis is evident in the fact that under the executive order, the May 16 primary election will go forward for all other races on the ballot.\u201d<\/p>\n For individual voters who have already cast an absentee ballot, the lawsuit adds: \u201cThey would be deprived of their fundamental right to vote under the Louisiana Constitution if that vote was cast aside.\u201d<\/p>\n The League of Women Voters of Louisiana, the Louisiana chapter of the N.A.A.C.P., the Power Coalition for Equity and Justice and a few individual voters joined together in the lawsuit. They are being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the A.C.L.U. of Louisiana and the Legal Defense Fund, some of the groups that were involved in the congressional redistricting case in Louisiana.<\/p>\n \u201cIt will create a lot of confusion and chaos,\u201d not only for voters but also for candidates who might have to consider running in different districts, Ms. Brannon said.<\/p>\n Another lawsuit, filed by a local chapter of the National Council of Jewish Women and backed by the Elias Law Group and National Redistricting Foundation, pointed to previous rulings by the Supreme Court that prevented maps from being changed close to an election.<\/p>\n \u201cQuite to the contrary, the Supreme Court has historically found that when voting in an election is within months of beginning \u2014 and, here, it has already begun \u2014 the state must proceed under the invalidated map, and any infirmities must be corrected for future elections,\u201d the lawsuit said.<\/p>\n Eric Holder, a former attorney general of the United States who served in the Obama administration, accused Mr. Landry of playing politics with the court decision in a statement accompanying the lawsuit.<\/p>\n \u201cLet\u2019s be clear, there is no emergency here, only a rush to disenfranchise voters by deliberately misconstruing the horrendous \u2018Callais\u2019 decision,\u201d Mr. Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court case. He added: \u201cPoliticians should not be changing election dates mid-voting because they fear the voters\u2019 decision will not match their own personal or partisan desires.\u201d<\/p>\n Both lawsuits were filed in state court in Baton Rouge.<\/p>\n A third lawsuit was filed in federal court late Thursday by Lindsay Garcia, a Democratic candidate for the Fifth Congressional District, and Eugene Collins, a voter in East Baton Rouge Parish.<\/p>\n That lawsuit echoed arguments that Mr. Landry\u2019s order was unconstitutional, as well as concerns about \u201cconfusion, depressed turnout and the prospect of being turned away from polling places that no longer know which contests are open and which are closed.\u201d Louisiana previously held open primaries where all candidates competed and the top two candidates advanced regardless of party affiliation.<\/p>\n On behalf of Black Louisiana voters, lawyers from the voting and civil rights groups asked the Supreme Court to delay its next procedural steps<\/a> until after the 2026 midterm elections.<\/p>\n