League of Women Voters of Greeley, Weld County v. Board of County Commissioners of Weld County (Amicus)

In 2018, Coloradoans adopted amendments to the state constitution that sought to end political gerrymandering and protect the rights of minority voters by establishing independent commissions for drawing congressional and state legislative districts. In 2021, the general assembly furthered the people’s will by adopting Redistricting Statutes that extend similar requirements to county commissioners—the only partisan offices in the state elected by districts that were not already covered by the constitutional amendments. Among other things, county commissions must propose several districting plans for public comment, hold numerous public hearings, and ensure that plans comply with enumerated substantive requirements.

After the Weld County Board of Commissioners failed to follow the statutory redistricting requirements, the League of Women Voters of Greeley-Weld County, the Latino Coalition of Weld County, and individual Weld County voters sued in state court. The district court granted summary judgment to plaintiffs on most of their claims, concluding that the Board had violated the Redistricting Statutes’ requirements. The Board appealed the decision to the Colorado Court of Appeals, arguing in part that the district court wrongly determined that plaintiffs had standing to challenge the maps and that the Redistricting Statutes implied a private right of action.

The ACLU and ACLU of Colorado filed an amicus brief in support of the Weld County voters. Our amicus brief discusses Colorado’s less-stringent standing precedent and explains that plaintiffs are sufficiently injured by the Board’s denial of access to required information, its failure to provide residents with the requisite opportunity to participate in the redistricting process, and its denial of plaintiffs’ right to vote under fairly drawn maps. Our brief further explains that the district court correctly determined that the Redistricting Statute includes an implied private right of action. Finally, we emphasize the significance of preserving voters’ access to state courts to vindicate their voting rights at a time when such rights are under assault in federal courts. For example, in 2019, when the U.S. Supreme Court barred federal partisan gerrymandering claims in Rucho v. Common Cause, it assured that it was not “condemn[ing] complaints about districting to echo into a void” because litigants could turn to “[p]rovisions in state statutes and state constitutions,” specifically noting Colorado’s laws. 588 U.S. 684, 719 (2019). Against this backdrop of federal retrenchment on voting rights, we argue that it is imperative that voters can enforce the protections of the Redistricting Statutes in Colorado courts.