It’s the continuation
of an issue first brought up a couple of years ago that gained legislative
scrutiny this past session. In the last round of reapportionment of city-parish
courts, East Baton Rouge had maintained its five districts, which in the
present day have three with majority white constituencies and two majority
black (although cases are not placed on dockets by geography; any of the judges
may hear cases from any part of the city-parish). Some have complained that
with the area having about 55 percent black population that this arrangement
was unfair, if not illegal, in some way, and filed suit accordingly.
Since judicial offices are not
considered policy-making institutions and that any judge may hear any case,
federal constitutional imperatives that channel state and local governments
into drawing district lines for other institutions place greater scrutiny on
those outcomes that prompt these governments typically to use race as a major
consideration into this districting, with the creation of “majority/minority”
districts, a scrutiny lacking when it comes to judicial redistricting. However,
even with the higher burden of proof suits leading to consent decrees in the
past have caused the state with jurisdictions with significant minority
populations to follow the same strategy with those judiciaries, with perhaps
the most famous example in Louisiana
being that of its Supreme Court.