A federal appeals court on Monday temporarily blocked Mississippi officials from creating a state-run court in part of the majority-Black capital city of Jackson.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted an administrative stay to the NAACP and other plaintiffs to block enforcement of Mississippi House Bill 1020 (HB 1020), which establishes the new court, until January 5. The legal battle began in April 2023 when the NAACP alleged that the bill violated Mississippi’s constitution by diminishing Mississippians’ right to elect their judges and singling out Hinds County, a predominately black community containing Jackson. The plaintiffs sought an injunction on the enforcement of provisions H.B. 1020.
The bill was signed in April 2023 amid other measures that Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves said would “strengthen public safety” in response to “Jackson’s unprecedented crime epidemic.” Jackson, Mississippi had the nation’s highest per-capita homicide rate in 2021. According to Governor Reeves, in 2022, Jackson would have ranked as one of the most dangerous cities in the world with its 88.9 homicide rate.
Governor Reeves said HB 1020 “creates an inferior municipal court charged with hearing cases from the Capitol Complex Improvement District (CCID). This court can be reviewed without deference by elected county and circuit court judges.” Judges in the district will be appointed by the white chief justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court instead of elected by the mostly-Black voters of the city. The bill has been criticized for creating a separate judicial district in the city’s “whiter and more affluent” neighborhoods.
The US DOJ labeled the bill racially discriminatory and intervened in July 2023. In a press release, the DOJ said, “These new appointments, which significantly change the form of government in Hinds County and the dynamic of power over the local criminal justice system, are intended to primarily benefit white residents in Jackson and to treat Black voters in Hinds County differently than white voters everywhere else in the state. ” Thus, the DOJ pointed out, “The United States’ complaint contends that HB 1020 was adopted with a discriminatory purpose in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.”
Previously, the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction was blocked because the court found the NAACP, and other plaintiffs, lacked standing. Article III standing is required for plaintiffs in federal court. A plaintiff in federal court establishes standing by showing an injury in fact, traceability, and redressability. According to the federal district court order denying the plaintiff’s motion for an injunction, during oral argument, counsel for the NAACP made the admission, “We are not claiming organizational standing,” and failed to plead an injury in fact.
The order by the Fifth Circuit states that the district court is directed to issue a final appealable order by noon on January 3.