Little Rock – On Thursday, Attorney General Tim Griffin filed a motion in federal court seeking to end a consent decree that has governed Arkansas judicial elections for more than thirty years. The decree, born out of the early‑1990s case Hunt v. Arkansas, created special subdistricts designed to give Black voters a stronger voice when electing judges.
Background of the consent decree
The original lawsuit challenged Arkansas’s at‑large judicial election system, arguing that it diluted the voting power of Black citizens and made it harder for them to elect judges of their choice. A federal court approved a settlement that established racially based subdistricts, a remedy intended to correct historic discrimination and ensure fair representation.
Attorney General’s constitutional challenge
Griffin argues that the decree now violates the U.S. Constitution because it “divides voters based on race,” which he says is contrary to equal‑protection principles. He cited recent Supreme Court rulings that have narrowed the permissible use of race in election‑related remedies. “Dividing voters based on race is wrong and unconstitutional. It is premised on racial stereotypes and contrary to equal protection mandates,” Griffin said in a statement announcing the motion.
NAACP response
The Arkansas NAACP strongly opposes the motion. Marie Hollowell, president of the Little Rock branch, warned that dismantling the decree could erode hard‑won protections for Black voting power. “I don’t think we can afford to keep allowing the civil rights act to be dismantled. These are protections that we have needed and for us obviously they are still needed,” she said.
State Conference President Barry Jefferson questioned the timing of the filing, noting it came just two days after the November 3 midterm elections. He suggested the move might be politically motivated and called for transparency from the attorney general’s office.
Potential impact
If the consent decree is terminated, the special subdistricts would disappear, returning Arkansas to its previous at‑large system. Critics argue this could make it more difficult for Black voters to elect judges who reflect their communities and could limit the ability to challenge discriminatory practices in court.
Supporters of the decree contend that it remains a necessary tool to address lingering effects of past discrimination and to preserve a more inclusive judiciary.
Next steps
The decree remains in effect while the federal judge reviews Griffin’s motion. The court will decide whether to keep, modify, or terminate the agreement. The Arkansas NAACP has indicated it will seek an opportunity to be heard during the proceedings, though no timeline for a ruling has been announced.
This legal battle underscores a broader national conversation about the role of race‑based remedies in elections and the balance between remedial measures and constitutional constraints.
Original reporting: KATV Little Rock (local) — read the source article.
