After harassing farmers, defending illegal immigrants and halting evictions
of drug dealers from public housing, one would think that LSC’s network
of legal service grantees would run out of questionable political activities
to pursue. Not so. Legal services programs are also hard at work in legislative
redistricting cases, education funding battles, and many other political
advocacy cases. Below is a sampling of the record of just a few LSC grantees.
TRLA Spearheads Legislative Redistricting Campaign
Texas Rural Legal Aid, in cooperation with the Mexican-American Legal
Defense and Education Fund, filed several suits in its successful effort
to prevent the Texas legislature from using 1990 census figures in apportioning
state legislative districts. TRLA argued that the census undercounted
racial and ethnic minorities and that any state redistricting plan based
on the census would be unconstitutional. In response, the state senate
drew up a plan which TRLA also found inadequate and succeeded in scuttling.
One Senator complained that while the plan created districts where Hispanics
would have the ability to win, the TRLA wanted a plan guaranteeing Hispanic
seats.
See Texas Lawyer, June 12, 1995;UPI “Senate Adopts
Plan” May 15, 1991
Grantees Sue LSC Over Redistricting Litigation Ban
In 1989, the LSC banned its grantees from participating in legislative redistricting cases in which they had been heavily involved throughout the ‘80s. The Corporation argued that the poor would be best served if grantees concentrated on their day-to-day legal needs such as landlord-tenant disputes and family law. Determined to pursue their political agenda, however, Texas Rural Legal Aid, California Rural Legal Assistance and North Mississippi Rural Legal Services sued the Corporation on the grounds that their financial benefactor had no right to tell them how to spend their money. A US Appeals Court disagreed. Judge Abner Mikva, now White House Counsel, wrote that “in light of the Act’s mandate to LSC to ensure that the legal services program remain free from partisan political involvement, we cannot conclude that” LSC has no right to prohibit its grantees from engaging in partisan activities.
See Texas Lawyer, August 12, 1991
TRLA Sues State to Force Increase in Higher Education Budget
In 1993, Texas Rural Legal Aid sued the State of Texas for not spending
what it considered enough money on universities and colleges along the
border. TRLA charged that the state’s system of higher education financing
was discriminatory because it deliberately underfunded border schools with
high percentages of Hispanic students. As evidence of discriminatory intent,
TRLA cited the fact that border students had to travel farther to get to
college than students in other parts of the state. The state supreme court
rejected the suit, arguing that the state’s financing was based on geographic
considerations and not national origin. The court also noted that the many
Mexican-Americans living in non-border areas of the state had just as easy
access to universities as other students.
See Texas Lawyer, October 18, 1993
TRLA Tries to Force State Takeover of Local School Districts
In 1991, Texas Rural Legal Aid tried to require local school districts
to finance the education of students outside the district. This was
a heavy-handed attempt to “equalize” education financing by forcing more
affluent districts to subsidize poorer ones. TRLA contended that because
the state created local school districts and defined their taxing authority,
all local school taxes are by definition state taxes. The state supreme
court held that local taxes are not “mere creatures” of the state and that
it would be unconstitutional for the state to confiscate local revenues.
See Edgewood School Dist. v. Kirby, No. D-0378 (TX. Supreme
Ct.) 1991
School District Forced to Abandon Electoral System
In 1992, Texas Rural Legal Aid sued the Del Valle Independent School
District, claiming that the district’s at-large system of electing board
members diluted minority voting strength. The district revised its system
to provide for the selection of five members from single member districts
and two at-large. However, TRLA rejected even this compromise and insisted
on seven single-member districts. A trial court eventually settled on a
six single member and one at-large plan.
See Del Valle Ind. School Dist. v. Lopez, No. D-2367 (TX Supreme
Ct.) 1992
California City Spends Fortune in Fighting Challenge to Electoral System
In California, the city of Oxnard spent $150,000 fending off a lawsuit by California Rural Legal Assistance that would have forced the city to replace its at-large electoral system for city council members with a district-based system. CLRA withdrew the suit when attorneys’ fees became too expensive.
See Los Angeles Times, “West County Voting Rights,” June
17, 1991