Toyukak v. Meyer

District Court, D. Alaska·Decided August 31, 2023·No. 3:13-cv-00137·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

MIKE TOYUKAK, et al.,

Plaintiffs, v.

NANCY DAHLSTROM1, et al.,

Defendants. Case No. 3:13-cv-00137-SLG

THIRD STIPULATED ORDER

I. PREAMBLE AND REMEDIES

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed this action to enforce the statutory guarantee of language assistance for limited-English proficient (LEP) Alaska Native, United States (U.S.) voting-age (18 years of age and older) citizens under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), 52 U.S.C. § 10503 (redesignated from 42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a) (Section 203), and the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and to obtain injunctive and declaratory relief pursuant to Section 3 of the VRA, 52 U.S.C. § 10302 (redesignated from 42 U.S.C. § 1973a), and 28 U.S.C. § 2201; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs contended that Defendants failed to provide effective language assistance to LEP Alaska Native voting-age citizens in the Dillingham Census

1 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), Lieutenant Governor Nancy Dahlstrom was automatically substituted as a party defendant as the successor in office to Kevin Meyer. Area (DCA), Kusilvak Census Area (KCA, formerly Wade Hampton Census Area), and Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area (YKCA) of Alaska; and WHEREAS, the Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331

& 1343(a)(3)-(4), 52 U.S.C. § 10308(f) (redesignated from 42 U.S.C. § 1973j(f)), the September 30, 2015 Stipulated Judgment and Order, and the September 20, 2021 Second Stipulated Order, and venue is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs are two individual LEP Yup’ik-speaking Alaska Native U.S. citizens of voting-age who are registered to vote or are eligible to register to vote and reside in the DCA and KCA and four tribal councils in the DCA, KCA, and YKCA that are the

elected governments for their respective villages, which include LEP Yup’ik- speaking or Gwich’in-speaking Alaska Native voting-age U.S. citizens who are registered to vote or are eligible to register to vote in federal and state elections; and WHEREAS, Defendants, in their official capacities, are the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Alaska, the Director of the Division of Elections for the State of Alaska, and the

Region III and Region IV Supervisors who are responsible under Alaska law for conducting elections in the DCA, KCA, and YKCA and are collectively referred to as “the Division of Elections” or “the Division”; and WHEREAS, the Division administers all federal, statewide, and Regional Educational Attendance Area (REAA) elections in the DCA, KCA, and YKCA; and

WHEREAS, this Third Stipulated Order (“Order”) is entered into by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants, hereinafter referred to jointly as the “Parties;” 2 WHEREAS, this Order takes effect upon issuance by this Court (the “Effective Date”); and WHEREAS, the DCA, KCA, and YKCA have been continuously covered under either

Section 4(f)(4) of the VRA and/or Section 203 of the VRA since October 22, 1975, 40 Fed. Reg. 49,422 (Oct. 22, 1975); 28 C.F.R. § 51, App.; and WHEREAS, it is undisputed that Section 203 applies to the villages in the DCA and KCA for the Yup’ik language; and WHEREAS, in the most recent Section 203 coverage determinations, coverage for Yup’ik was triggered in the DCA (see Dep’t of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Voting

Rights Act Amendments of 2006, Determinations Under Section 203 (2021 Coverage Determinations), 86 Fed. Reg. 69,611, 69,612 (Dec. 8, 2021)); and WHEREAS, the most recent Section 203 coverage determinations included coverage for Yup’ik in the KCA (see 2021 Coverage Determinations); and WHEREAS, the most recent Section 203 coverage determinations did not include

coverage for Alaskan Athabascan (including Gwich’in) in the YKCA (see 2021 Coverage Determinations); and WHEREAS, according to the census data underlying the 2021 Coverage Determinations, the DCA has 2,411 U.S. citizens of voting-age who speak Yup’ik, approximately 235 of whom are LEP and 54 are also illiterate; and

WHEREAS, according to the census data underlying the 2021 Coverage Determinations, the KCA has 3,829 U.S. citizens of voting-age who speak Yup’ik, 3 approximately 304 of whom are LEP and 43 are also illiterate; and

WHEREAS, according to the census data underlying the 2021 Coverage Determinations, the YKCA has 2,535 U.S. citizens of voting-age who speak Alaskan Athabascan, approximately 77 of whom are LEP and 9 are also illiterate; and WHEREAS, the 2021 Coverage Determinations were “effective upon publication in the Federal Register” and are not “subject to review in any court” (52 U.S.C. § 10503(b)(4) (redesignated from 42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a(b)(4))); and WHEREAS, the DCA, KCA, and YKCA have not bailed out from coverage under Section 203 pursuant to Section 203(d) of the VRA, 52 U.S.C. § 10503(d) (redesignated from

42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a(d)); and WHEREAS, following the Court’s decision on the law of the case [Dkt. 124], this case proceeded through a two-week trial that concluded on July 3, 2014, and resulted in a partial Decision on Record issued by the Court on September 3, 2014 [Dkt. 223], an Interim Order issued by the Court on September 22, 2014 [Dkt. 226], to implement relief for the

November 4, 2014 General Election, and a Stipulated Judgment and Order issued by the Court on September 30, 2015 [Dkt. 282]; and WHEREAS, the Parties negotiated a Second Stipulated Order, which the Court issued on September 20, 2021 [Dkt. 333]; and WHEREAS, the Plaintiffs wished to extend the Second Stipulated Order and the

Defendants agreed to extend it past its December 31, 2022 expiration date; and WHEREAS, the Parties want to collect reliable information about the conduct of 4 elections in Alaska and the language assistance provided and to provide this information to the Court; and WHEREAS, Defendants do not admit and specifically deny liability on all claims and

do not concede the Court’s holdings were correct, but to avoid protracted and costly litigation, the Parties have conferred in good faith and agreed that the Plaintiffs’ request should be resolved through the terms of this enforceable Order.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Toyukak v. Meyer, (D. Alaska 2023).

Toyukak v. Meyer (Toyukak v. Meyer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail
502 U.S. 367 (Supreme Court, 1992)
United States v. Sandoval County, Nm
797 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (D. New Mexico, 2011)
United States v. Oregon
913 F.2d 576 (Ninth Circuit, 1990)