|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A federal lawsuit that aims to change Spring Branch ISD’s election system to bring more representation to the school board will likely be delayed for months, pending decisions in several other cases that could impact the legality of the suit altogether.
The uncertainty surrounding the lawsuit comes at a time of renewed concerns about inequity in the district as it faces budget cuts and several potential school closures that many fear disproportionately impact the district’s underserved communities.
Resident Virginia Elizondo filed the lawsuit against the district in 2021, arguing Spring Branch violates the Voting Rights Act and creates a lack of representation by holding at-large elections, a system in which each voter in the district casts their ballot for every trustee position.
Community members have long critiqued the district’s inequities, illuminated by the way Interstate 10 runs through the district and creates two contrasting sides. Currently, every board member resides in neighborhoods south of I-10, which is defined by rows of affluent subdivisions and starkly differs from the underserved neighborhoods on the north side.
Elizondo and residents advocating for better representation want the district to switch to a single-member district system, which breaks a district up into sections with a similar number of residents who then vote for a singular trustee that lives in their area.
Patricia Cabrera, a longtime community organizer from the north side who was expected to testify at a now-canceled trial, said the decision is disappointing and comes at a time when better representation is needed more than ever.
“The inequity, the injustice of it, is still there. With the current school closings, it really gives us more reason,” said Cabrera. “If we had representation on the north side … someone from our community would have been more sensitive to things that are happening, because they live here.”
The west Houston district serves a 57 percent Hispanic and 57 percent economically disadvantaged population. The lawsuit states the district’s diverse resident and student population hasn’t yet been reflected in the board of trustees, which is both “regrettable and “remediable.” Efforts to reach attorneys representing Elizondo were unsuccessful Thursday.
Until trustee John Perez was elected in 2022, no person of color had served on Spring Branch’s board. Some believe a single-member system will allow voters to elect individuals that more intimately understand the issues impacting their respective communities.
For their part, district leaders have adamantly opposed switching to a single-member district system, arguing the at-large system is most effective. No board members were made available for an interview about the case Thursday.
But now, it will likely be months before the case moves any further, an attorney representing Spring Branch said. On Wednesday, Judge Sim Lake canceled the trial that was set for Monday, Dec. 4, pending the decision of two other cases in higher courts that will likely impact the suit.
Both cases, before two separate Circuit Courts of Appeals, seek a decision on whether it’s legal for private citizens — like Elizondo — to bring forth lawsuits against governing entities under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Section 2 states that “no voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any state or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color” — which Elizondo argues the district does with its current election setup.
“The judge is waiting to see what higher courts say about the law in this area before proceeding with a trial, to ensure that we understand what the law is before we go forward,” said Lucas Henry, an attorney representing Spring Branch.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decided that only the Department of Justice or the Attorney General is entitled to bring such lawsuits against government entities. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals said the opposite.
Depending on the outcome of both cases, it could be several months or over a year until the district’s case can move forward, Board President Chris Earnest said in a statement. If there’s a conflict between the decisions of these cases after rehearings, it’s likely the U.S. Supreme Court would hear an appeal, Henry said. And if it’s ruled that private citizens cannot bring forth such lawsuits, the case against the district could be dismissed.
“I'm disappointed that we look like we're moving along, and then a boulder falls out of the sky,” Cabrera said. “But this could be a real blow, or it could be an opportunity. We will continue to participate and organize.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print.
