Modesto cites high court in vote case

Can school ruling be applied to city?
By Adam Ashton
MCT NEWS SERVICE
July 22, 2007
MODESTO – U.S. Supreme Court justices in
June decided race can't be the only factor in determining school attendance
policies. Officials in this Central Valley city are arguing the same standards should apply
to its City Council elections.
On Thursday, Modesto asked the Supreme Court to strike
a 2002 state voting law that three Latino residents are using to sue Modesto for election reforms.
John McDermott, the Los Angeles attorney representing the city in
the case, sharpened his argument to overturn the California Voting Rights Act
on the court's recent decision prohibiting school busing programs in Kentucky and Washington.
In that 5-4 ruling on
school boundaries, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “The way to stop
discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of
race.”
In a petition to the
court, McDermott wrote that the California voting law allows racial groups
to overturn at-large council election systems, such as the one Modesto uses, without demonstrating
discrimination.
Federal voting laws
protect minorities from discrimination at the polls, McDermott wrote.
He wrote that the court
should strike down the California law because it “will lead to
widespread unjustified use of race to invalidate literally thousands of
at-large systems in California cities, school districts and
special districts, without proof of racial injury.”
The city's appeal stems
from a 2004 lawsuit filed against Modesto by the Lawyers Committee for
Civil Rights on behalf of Latino residents Emma Pinedo,
Enrique Sanchez and Salvador Vera.
They argue that Modesto's at-large council elections
dilute the power of minority votes. They seek district elections as a remedy to
the racial polarization they see in Modesto voting patterns.
One Latino – Balvino Irizarry, who served from 1987 to 1991 – has been
elected to the council in nearly 100 years.
California's 5th District Court of Appeal in
Fresno upheld the state voting law and
sided with the Latinos in December. The state Supreme Court in March upheld the
law by declining to hear the city's case.
Robert Rubin, the lawyer
representing the Modesto residents, is expected to write
an argument to the U.S. Supreme Court to try to persuade justices against
hearing Modesto's latest appeal.
The U.S. Supreme Court
typically receives thousands of petitions each year. Of those, it usually
agrees to consider fewer than 100.
“We think the state court
of appeal got it right and the Supreme Court ought to be deferential to the
state court's interpretation of the state statute,” Rubin said.
McDermott must persuade
four justices to consider the case to get it on their calendar. He said the
city should find out in October whether the court will hear the case.
Modesto is moving to place a measure on
the November ballot that could lead to the creation of district elections for council
races.
Voters are expected to
see an “advisory measure” on that ballot. It would ask them whether they prefer
one of two methods of district elections. The format that receives the most
votes would be subject to a second, binding election in February.