Baton Rouge judges’ voting rights fight could shape the next judicial election
Three Baton Rouge judges are challenging a law that changes judicial election districts, putting voting rights and the next judicial election at the center of a federal court fight.
With judicial elections approaching, a federal lawsuit over East Baton Rouge Parish’s judicial districts raises a question that reaches beyond the courthouse: Who has the authority to change how voters choose their judges?
BATON ROUGE — Three 19th Judicial District Court judges are asking a federal court to stop Louisiana from enforcing a 2025 law that changes the court’s election system, arguing that the Legislature altered a voting rights arrangement without first obtaining approval from the federal court that established it.
The case involves Chief Judge Donald R. Johnson and Judges Ronald R. Johnson and Gail Horne Ray. They filed suit Feb. 27 against Gov. Jeff Landry, Attorney General Liz Murrill and Secretary of State Nancy Landry. The lawsuit seeks a declaration that Act 243 cannot be enforced unless the changes are approved in the longstanding federal voting rights case Clark v. Edwards.
The latest development is procedural, but important. On April 22, a federal magistrate judge canceled a scheduling conference and set new deadlines after the defendants sought to transfer the case to the judge overseeing Clark v. Edwards. The defendants filed a reply supporting that request on April 20. The docket does not show a final ruling on the transfer motion.
That means the lawsuit remains active, but the court has not yet ruled on whether Act 243 violates the earlier voting rights decree.
Why the election system matters
Act 243, signed by Landry on June 11, 2025, changed the 19th Judicial District Court from three election sections, each electing five judges, to two sections, each electing seven judges, plus one at-large judgeship. The law also reassigned judicial divisions among the sections.
The judges’ challenge is rooted in Clark v. Edwards, a federal case that found Louisiana’s judicial election system diluted the voting strength of minority citizens. The court later approved a consent decree requiring subdistricts for affected courts, including the 19th Judicial District.
The plaintiffs argue that Act 243 changed that court-approved arrangement without first asking the federal court to modify it. They are seeking a declaratory judgment that the new system is not enforceable unless and until the court approves the changes.
A previous challenge already failed
The current lawsuit follows an earlier legal challenge involving a special election for the seat formerly held by Judge Wilson E. Fields.
In that case, Donald Johnson and other plaintiffs argued that Act 243 moved 1,781 registered voters in Ward 1 Precincts 8 and 40 out of the election section that existed when the governor issued the special-election proclamation. They asked the court to require the election to be conducted under the old boundaries.
The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of that request in September 2025. The court said the old boundaries no longer existed when candidates qualified and that restoring them would require a discretionary decision, not a ministerial act by election officials.
That ruling did not decide whether Act 243 is constitutional or whether it violates the federal consent decree. The broader federal challenge remains separate.
What voters should watch
The practical question for voters is whether the current election structure will remain in place when the next judicial races are held.
The Secretary of State’s voter portal currently lists judgeships under the 19th Judicial District’s election sections, including Gail Horne Ray in Election Section 2, Division G, and Ronald Johnson in Election Section 2, Division L. The portal lists their terms as expiring Dec. 31, 2026.
But the pending lawsuit does not mean the election system has been overturned. Act 243 remains the law unless a court blocks it or the Legislature changes it. The federal court’s next ruling could determine whether the law can be enforced while the voting rights case remains unresolved.
For East Baton Rouge voters, the issue is not simply a dispute among judges and state officials. It is a question about how judicial representation is structured — and whether changes to that structure must first pass through the federal court that established the protections.
The next major development will be a ruling on the transfer request or a decision addressing whether Act 243 can be enforced under the existing voting rights decree.
