Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN Texas Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott Thursday urged the U.S. Department of Justices Civil Rights Division to end their attempts to unnecessarily delay the Section 5 preclearance proceedings for the State of Texas redistricting maps. In the letter to Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez Attorney General Abbott explains that DOJs approach which includes repeated efforts to draw-out the litigation by twice asking for redundant and extensive discovery and unnecessarily delaying the Section 5 trial through a motion to abate inflicts harm on Texas voters and goes against the mutual agreement between Texas and DOJ to resolve this matter as expeditiously as possible. The full text of the letter is below.
December 1 2011
The Honorable Tom Perez
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington DC 20530
Dear Mr. Perez:
I write regarding the Civil Rights Divisions efforts to delay Section 5 preclearance of the State of Texas redistricting maps.
Throughout this process the Department of Justice has used dilatory tactics in an apparent effort to stall the process so that interim legislative and congressional maps are imposed upon the State of Texas. This approach is not only detrimental to Texas voters it is inconsistent with our mutual agreement to resolve this matter in an expeditious and professional manner.
Accordingly I write to request that the Department of Justice end its attempts to further delay court proceedings in State of Texas v. United States and work proactively with the State of Texas to encourage the D.C. District Court to conduct a trial on the merits as soon as possible.
When we spoke on July 19 shortly after Texas sought a declaratory judgment from the D.C. District Court preclearing the States redistricting maps we both agreed that our offices could and should approach this litigation in a manner that was cooperative productive and professional. As you may recall I specifically mentioned that the Texas Legislature moved up the candidate filing period in order to comply with the federal MOVE Act.
In order to help expedite the process I informed you that Texas would voluntarily provide the Civil Rights Division informal preclearance submissions so that your staff would have all the information necessary to review the States maps as quickly as possible. You indicated that you understood the need for a quick resolution of this matter given Texas advanced filing period.
Because I assume your assurances were made in good faith perhaps you are unaware of your Divisions repeated efforts to draw out the litigation rather than expedite the process.
For example shortly after Texas filed its petition for declaratory judgment we filed a motion asking the district court to review this matter on an expedited basis. Your office opposed that motion. Further despite the fact that we promptly responded to the Civil Rights Divisions repeated requests for additional information about the States redistricting plans your office nonetheless demanded extensive discovery that further delayed the process.
Indeed although the Civil Rights Division with logistical assistance from my office conducted multiple witness interviews outside the formal discovery process your staff nonetheless insisted upon taking many of those very same witnesses depositions. By any objective measure this redundant approach unnecessarily delayed the preclearance process.
Most recently the State of Texas requested that the district court hold a Section 5 trial the second week of December to help ensure that the State can conduct its primary elections as required by the Texas Election Code in March. Nonetheless the Civil Rights Division has asked the D.C. District Court to delay the Section 5 trial until after the Supreme Court has resolved the States emergency applications to stay implementation of the interim maps ordered by the Western District of Texas.
Your offices motion to abate will only unnecessarily delay the preclearance process even further. But worse as an apparent dilatory backup plan the Division has asked the court for an additional 150 days of discovery in the event the Divisions motion to abate is denied.
The Divisions request for five additional months of unnecessary delay can only be construed as a misguided effort to further postpone an expeditious resolution of this case. Indeed only yesterday your office objected to holding a status conference with the D.C. District Court to discuss these very issues. The Divisions objection to a mere conference call with the court the sole purpose of which would be to help resolve the parties differing views on when a trial should be held can only be viewed as another attempt to delay preclearance of Texas redistricting plans.
Given your assurances during our telephone call I hope you will review the Civil Rights Divisions dilatory legal strategy and consider working proactively with my office to ensure that the preclearance trial proceeds as quickly as possible. Further I request that the Civil Rights Division withdraw its motion to abate and that we finally allow the court to resolve this case.
While I understand that we may disagree on the legal issues hopefully we can both agree that federal law gives the courts authority to resolve our disagreement and similarly recognize that this matter therefore needs to be resolved by courts as quickly as possible.
Sincerely
Greg Abbott
Attorney General of Texas
Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN Texas Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott Thursday urged the U.S. Department of Justices Civil Rights Division to end their attempts to unnecessarily delay the Section 5 preclearance proceedings for the State of Texas redistricting maps. In the letter to Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez Attorney General Abbott explains that DOJs approach which includes repeated efforts to draw-out the litigation by twice asking for redundant and extensive discovery and unnecessarily delaying the Section 5 trial through a motion to abate inflicts harm on Texas voters and goes against the mutual agreement between Texas and DOJ to resolve this matter as expeditiously as possible. The full text of the letter is below.
December 1 2011
The Honorable Tom Perez
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington DC 20530
Dear Mr. Perez:
I write regarding the Civil Rights Divisions efforts to delay Section 5 preclearance of the State of Texas redistricting maps.
Throughout this process the Department of Justice has used dilatory tactics in an apparent effort to stall the process so that interim legislative and congressional maps are imposed upon the State of Texas. This approach is not only detrimental to Texas voters it is inconsistent with our mutual agreement to resolve this matter in an expeditious and professional manner.
Accordingly I write to request that the Department of Justice end its attempts to further delay court proceedings in State of Texas v. United States and work proactively with the State of Texas to encourage the D.C. District Court to conduct a trial on the merits as soon as possible.
When we spoke on July 19 shortly after Texas sought a declaratory judgment from the D.C. District Court preclearing the States redistricting maps we both agreed that our offices could and should approach this litigation in a manner that was cooperative productive and professional. As you may recall I specifically mentioned that the Texas Legislature moved up the candidate filing period in order to comply with the federal MOVE Act.
In order to help expedite the process I informed you that Texas would voluntarily provide the Civil Rights Division informal preclearance submissions so that your staff would have all the information necessary to review the States maps as quickly as possible. You indicated that you understood the need for a quick resolution of this matter given Texas advanced filing period.
Because I assume your assurances were made in good faith perhaps you are unaware of your Divisions repeated efforts to draw out the litigation rather than expedite the process.
For example shortly after Texas filed its petition for declaratory judgment we filed a motion asking the district court to review this matter on an expedited basis. Your office opposed that motion. Further despite the fact that we promptly responded to the Civil Rights Divisions repeated requests for additional information about the States redistricting plans your office nonetheless demanded extensive discovery that further delayed the process.
Indeed although the Civil Rights Division with logistical assistance from my office conducted multiple witness interviews outside the formal discovery process your staff nonetheless insisted upon taking many of those very same witnesses depositions. By any objective measure this redundant approach unnecessarily delayed the preclearance process.
Most recently the State of Texas requested that the district court hold a Section 5 trial the second week of December to help ensure that the State can conduct its primary elections as required by the Texas Election Code in March. Nonetheless the Civil Rights Division has asked the D.C. District Court to delay the Section 5 trial until after the Supreme Court has resolved the States emergency applications to stay implementation of the interim maps ordered by the Western District of Texas.
Your offices motion to abate will only unnecessarily delay the preclearance process even further. But worse as an apparent dilatory backup plan the Division has asked the court for an additional 150 days of discovery in the event the Divisions motion to abate is denied.
The Divisions request for five additional months of unnecessary delay can only be construed as a misguided effort to further postpone an expeditious resolution of this case. Indeed only yesterday your office objected to holding a status conference with the D.C. District Court to discuss these very issues. The Divisions objection to a mere conference call with the court the sole purpose of which would be to help resolve the parties differing views on when a trial should be held can only be viewed as another attempt to delay preclearance of Texas redistricting plans.
Given your assurances during our telephone call I hope you will review the Civil Rights Divisions dilatory legal strategy and consider working proactively with my office to ensure that the preclearance trial proceeds as quickly as possible. Further I request that the Civil Rights Division withdraw its motion to abate and that we finally allow the court to resolve this case.
While I understand that we may disagree on the legal issues hopefully we can both agree that federal law gives the courts authority to resolve our disagreement and similarly recognize that this matter therefore needs to be resolved by courts as quickly as possible.
Sincerely
Greg Abbott
Attorney General of Texas
