More than a dozen Republican attorneys general — including those from Alabama and Georgia — have signed on to a Louisiana-based court brief suggesting that private groups don’t have a right to challenge Voting Rights Act violations.

The three aforementioned states are among several that have recently had  district maps challenged via lawsuits from private groups.

Judges have already ruled against the Alabama and Georgia maps, ordering that a second majority-Black congressional district be added to provide Black voters an opportunity to elect the candidates of their choice in response to Black population growth.

Similarly, plaintiffs in the Louisiana case — the Louisiana NAACP, Power Coalition for Equity and Justice, and a handful of individuals — argue that even though Black residents make up one-third of their states’ populations, they can only currently elect their candidate of choice in one out of the six congressional districts.

The lawsuit argues that by failing to include a second minority opportunity district, the new Republican-enacted congressional map dilutes the voting strength of Black residents in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The U.S. District Court Middle District of Louisiana has already affirmed that Louisiana’s congressional map likely violated the Voting Rights Act. However, a remedial hearing is scheduled for Feb. 5 in the United States District Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit, with the state arguing that private parties can’t bring claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The 13 Republican attorneys generals who signed on to the brief supporting the argument state that Section 2 provides that only the U.S. Attorney General has the authority to enforce the guarantees of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

“That question is answered in Section 12, which provides the enforcement mechanisms — criminal and civil enforcement actions by the federal government…,” the brief states, “because ‘the express provision of one method of enforcing a substantive rule suggests that Congress intended to preclude others.'”

The attorneys general referenced a similar case in Arkansas where a three-judge panel of the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state.

“If the text and structure of (Section) 2 and (Section) 12 show anything, it is that Congress intended to place enforcement in the hands of the Attorney General, rather than private parties,” the Court stated in the Arkansas case.

The amicus brief also argues that there is no Section 2 liability unless it is shown that members of a protected class “have less opportunity” not just “to elect representatives of their choice” but also “to participate in the political process.”

“There was no finding by the district court or panel that Black Louisianans today are denied the opportunity to register to vote, exercise their right to vote, choose the political party they desire to support, or participate equally in its affairs,” the amicus brief states. “To the contrary, the district court noted the lack of ‘specific evidence’ of disparities in ‘political participation outcomes’ regarding ‘levels of black voter registration, … turnout among black voters, or any other factor tending to show that past discrimination has affected their ability to participate in the political process.”

Attorneys general from Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia also signed on supporting Louisiana.

After the 2020 Census, states were tasked with redrawing state and congressional districts to accommodate updated population numbers. Since then, new district maps have been challenged in more than a dozen states.