Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a federal district court’s decision to uphold Lake County’s use of the Missouri Plan, which allows Indiana’s governor to appoint judges who serve on the county’s superior court.
The circuit court’s opinion comes nearly two years after arguments were heard in the case. The case was argued in front of circuit judges Diane Sykes, Amy St. Eve and John Lee.
The case names the city of Hammond and three voters, including Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott, as plaintiffs. The Lake County Board of Elections, the State of Indiana and the Indiana Secretary of State’s office are named as defendants.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs declined to comment on the decision and recommended The Indiana Lawyer reach out to the mayor’s office directly. The mayor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
An attorney for the Lake County Board of Elections declined to comment, as the board was a neutral party in the litigation, attorney Michael Tolbert told The Indiana Lawyer. Attorneys listed for the state and the secretary of state did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In 2021, the city of Hammond and three voters sued the Lake County Judicial Nominating Commission, arguing that the state’s use of the Missouri Plan violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The Missouri Plan, named after the state it was developed in, is a hybrid, merit-based method of filling judicial vacancies in which the governor appoints judges from a list of nominees submitted by a nonpartisan commission that vets candidates based on their qualifications, according to court documents. Once appointed, the judges face periodic retention elections in which county voters can elect who remains in office.
The Missouri Plan is used in Lake, Marion and St. Joseph counties in Indiana.
The plaintiffs argued the Missouri Plan violates the federal Voting Rights Act because it gives Lake County’s minority voters “less opportunity” than other voters to elect judges, court documents state. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits states from imposing voting standards that racially discriminate against voters.
According to demographic data used by plaintiffs to support their argument, minorities comprise more than 40% of the voting-age population in Lake County. In most other Indiana counties, less than 20% of the voting-age population are minorities, according to court documents.
As the case moved through the legal system, the Lake County Board of Elections and the Indiana Secretary of State’s office were added as defendants. The Lake County Judicial Nominating Commission was eventually dismissed as a defendant
At its core, the case challenges what the Missouri Plan is, 7th Circuit Judge Diane Sykes wrote in the court’s July 2 opinion. The case presents a doctrinal puzzle for the court, as litigation involving Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act usually concerns redistricting maps or rules governing the time, place and manner of an election – in other words, how an election is run.
The United States Supreme Court has never recognized Section 2 as a vehicle to challenge the method of an election specifically, Sykes wrote.
In addition, the case falls within crosscutting circuit court precedent, according to the circuit court’s opinion. In Quinn v. Illinois, 887 F.3d 322, 323–24 (7th Cir. 2018), the circuit court held that Section 2 doesn’t require a public officer to be elected rather than appointed. But in Bradley v. Work, 154 F.3d 704, 709 (7th Cir. 1998), the court held that Section 2 applies to Indiana’s use of the Missouri Plan to select judges in Lake County, according to the opinion.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana determined that Quinn v. Illinois applies and entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants, stating that the Missouri Plan does not violate the Voting Rights Act. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that Quinn should be overruled.
After hearing oral arguments in the case in Sept. 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision that held that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act imposes liability “only when the circumstances give rise to a strong interference that intentional discrimination occurred,” Louisiana v. Callais, 145 S. Ct. 434 (mem) (2024), at 1156.
The circuit court relies on the supreme court’s judgment to determine that there is no evidence that the state of Indiana’s decision to implement the Missouri Plan in Lake County back in 1973 was to discriminate based on race. Instead, the state adopted the plan through a study-backed recommendation by the Institute for Court Management that found “pervasive dissatisfaction” with the way the county’s trial courts were functioning. That dissatisfaction was due in large part to the pressures and distractions of partisan judicial elections, Sykes wrote.
“There’s no evidence that its decision was motivated by the number or percentage of minority voters in Lake County or had anything at all to do with race,” Sykes wrote.
The case is City of Hammond, et al v. Lake County Board of Elections, et al, 24-1125.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.