Houston Landing Reports on Humble ISD Voting Rights Action
May 9, 2024 – Houston Landing reports on a Voting Rights Act lawsuit filed by Brewer Storefront on behalf of plaintiff Judith Bautista against the Humble Independent School District on Thursday, alleging the election system violates the VRA by preventing Hispanic voters from electing their preferred school board candidates. The lawsuit was filed as part of the Storefront’s recently announced Texas Voting Rights Initiative (TVRI).
Houston Landing reports that the lawsuit was brought by Bautista, a former Spanish teacher in the district. There are currently no Hispanic trustees on the board.
“Regrettably, the diverse ethnic and racial makeup of Humble ISD is not reflected in its elected Board of Trustees — who live in a cluster in the predominantly white (and higher income) areas within Humble ISD,” the lawsuit states.
The Landing reports that the suit seeks as a remedy for the court to mandate that Humble ISD adopted “single member districts.” The article mentions that the lack of Hispanic representation contributes to the district’s “achievement gap” between students of color and white students.
Read the Houston Landing report here.
Houston Chronicle Reports on Humble ISD Voting Rights Lawsuit
May 10, 2024 – The Houston Chronicle reports on a voting rights lawsuit filed by Brewer Storefront on behalf of plaintiff Judith Bautista against the Humble Independent School District on Thursday. The lawsuit was filed as part of the Storefront’s recently announced Texas Voting Rights Initiative (TVRI).
The article notes that the lawsuit states that the district has a geographically significant Hispanic population that would allow for at least one Hispanic-majority single member district to be drawn for increased representation.
The article notes that the lawsuit comes after the Storefront sent letters to 11 school districts in March as part of a statewide initiative to secure voting rights among Texas’ minority populations.
Brewer Storefront Partner William Brewer told the Chronicle that the plaintiff is now taking action because "time is of the essence when people are being denied the right to fairly participate in the political process," adding that the board "indicated no meaningful willingness to bring the electoral system into compliance with the Voting Rights Act."
Read the Houston Chronicle report here.
Law 360 Reports on NRA Reaction to NYAG Filing
May 8, 2024 – Law360 reports that Brewer client the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) responded to a filing by the New York Attorney General (NYAG) in which she asked a New York judge not to "reverse" a Manhattan jury's verdict. The jury verdict was entered in the NYAG vs. NRA lawsuit on February 23, 2024.
NRA lawyer William A. Brewer III told the publication, "In her response to the NRA's motion for judgement post-trial, the NYAG advances a number of novel legal theories to save the claims she presented at trial ... The NYAG's theories have no grounding in existing law. We look forward to responding."
The report states, "In February, jurors found that [former NRA Executive Vice President Wayne] LaPierre, who resigned on the eve of trial, as well as general counsel John Frazer and retired Chief Financial Officer Wilson 'Woody' Phillips, breached their fiduciary duties. Frazer was additionally held responsible for the false filings and Phillips for the related-party transactions. The verdict requires LaPierre to repay $4.4 million in ill-gotten funds to the NRA for his breaches, while Phillips must pay back $2 million."
A second phase of the proceedings is scheduled to begin in July – a bench trial before Justice Joel M. Cohen, in which the judge is expected to rule on any final remedies against defendants. In the final analysis, individual defendants could face financial awards payable to the NRA. No money damages will be awarded against the Association.
Read the report here.
Lawsuit Claims Humble ISD Electoral System Violates Voting Rights Act of 1965
Dallas, Texas…May 9, 2024 – Brewer Storefront filed suit in federal court today on behalf of plaintiff Judith Bautista against the Humble Independent School District (Humble ISD) and its trustees, alleging that the school district’s election system violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it denies fair representation to Hispanic voters.
Filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, the lawsuit claims that the school district’s at-large voting system denies Hispanic voters a fair opportunity to elect school board representatives of their choice. The Storefront is the community service legal affiliate of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors.
The lawsuit alleges that, based on the district’s demographics, one would expect that at least one Latino board member could be elected. Yet, none of the seven board members are Hispanic, and five are white. The complaint cities Hispanic candidates who ran for the board in recent years, such as Asdrubal “Dru” Gutierrez in 2023 and Liz Diaz in 2021, who lost to white candidates.
“Our client believes the at-large election system used by Humble ISD denies Hispanic voters a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing – trustees that represent their interests, schools and communities,” says William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer Storefront and lead counsel for plaintiff Judith Bautista. “The suit seeks the court-ordered adoption of a single member district voting system that allows every member of the community an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing.”
In March 2024, Brewer Storefront launched the Texas Voting Rights Initiative (TVRI), a statewide effort focused on ensuring that Texas school boards operate in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. The Storefront undertook an extensive analysis of voting systems across Texas and believes that many operate in violation of the VRA.
The Storefront sent warning letters to 11 school districts on March 6, including Humble ISD, advising that they are violating Section 2 of the VRA. The letter requests that the school board adopt a single member district system that includes at least four opportunity districts for minority voters, including at least one district in which the Hispanic citizen voting age population (CVAP) comprises a majority.
“The school board refused the opportunity to avoid litigation and proactively change the election system to comply with the Voting Rights Act,” Brewer said. “Our plaintiff has stepped up in an effort to secure a fair chance for Hispanics to attain a seat on the board that oversees management of the school district, including hiring the superintendent. Such representation benefits students, schools, and communities – in the pursuit of greater opportunity for all children.”
Humble ISD is a richly diverse school district. As of the 2022-23 school year, students of color comprised more than 70% of the Humble ISD student body and more than 38% of students were Hispanic. The district enrolls nearly 48,000 students. However, a significant “achievement gap” between Hispanic and white students, and between the lower performing elementary schools in the district that are majority minority in enrollment and higher achieving schools situated in the neighborhoods in which the members of the Humble ISD board of trustees reside.
According to the complaint, all individuals in the top seven highest- ranking administrative positions in the District are white – the superintendent, associate superintendent, two deputy superintendents, and three assistant superintendents.
Under the current electoral system, school board members are elected at large. Candidates run for “places” but do not represent any specific geographic area.
The lawsuit alleges that, “The Hispanic population within the Humble ISD is sufficiently numerous and geographically compact to allow for the creation of at least one single-member electoral district in which the Hispanic population would constitute a majority of the total population and the citizen voting age population.”
The lawsuit continues, “Further, the Hispanic voters are politically cohesive, and elections for the Board at issue reflect a clear pattern of racially polarized voting that allows the bloc of white voters to usually defeat the Hispanic community’s preferred candidate.”
According to the lawsuit, the numbers of Hispanic voters are sufficiently large and geographically compact such that at least one single-member electoral district could be created in which Hispanics are a majority.
Bautista, who is Mexican American, is the daughter of immigrants from Monterrey, Mexico, a U.S. citizen, registered voter and homeowner. Her two children attend Humble ISD schools.
She previously worked as a Spanish teacher at Humble ISD’s Summer Creek High School from 2017 to 2023. She is currently enrolled in the Hispanic Studies Ph.D. program at the University of Houston, pursuing a concentration in Latino studies. Her thesis is focused on the implementation of cultural programs in schools to promote cultural diversity and language maintenance.
Ms. Bautista’s community involvement is extensive. She has volunteered for Raíces Unidas (United Roots), an organization in Houston focused on linking the Hispanic community with essential resources. She also has volunteered with the National Hispanic Professional Organization (NHPO) in Houston.
“I am concerned about the lack of sensitivity toward equity and diversity in Humble ISD,” said Bautista, who intends to run for the school board in 2025. “Much work is needed in Humble ISD to better serve the Latino community.”
The Storefront has successfully challenged violations of the Voting Rights Act on behalf of other communities of interest in previous actions.
The Storefront successfully resolved Voting Rights Act cases with the Lewisville Independent School District in 2023, Richardson Independent School District in January 2019, the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in 2015, and the Grand Prairie Independent School District in 2014. All districts now utilize remodeled voting systems. The Storefront also secured trial victories in Voting Rights Act cases against the Irving Independent School District in 2014, the City of Farmers Branch in 2012, and the City of Irving in 2009. Those lawsuits paved the way for the formation of new voting systems and the election of minority candidates.
About Brewer Storefront, PLLC:
Brewer Storefront is the community-service legal affiliate of the national litigation firm of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors with offices in Dallas and New York. Founded in 1995, the Brewer Storefront tackles local and national issues, providing legal assistance to a wide range of individuals, business and community entities in need. Visit www.brewerstorefront.com.
Contact: Katherine Leal Unmuth on behalf of the Brewer Storefront
Phone: 214.653.4832
E-mail: kunmuth@brewerattorneys.com
Westwood High School Students Crowned Champion of International Public Policy Forum Debate Contest
May 5, 2024 – New York – A team of students from Westwood High School of Austin, Texas, bested a field of high schools from around the globe Saturday, winning the 23rd Annual Brewer Foundation/New York University International Public Policy Forum (IPPF) debate competition and a $10,000 grand prize. The final debate was held at The Harold Pratt House in New York City.
The teams that competed in the IPPF Finals on Saturday, May 4, were the final “Elite Eight” teams to emerge from a field of 311 teams. The IPPF’s 23rd annual competition began in October 2023, as teams representing schools in 26 countries and 33 U.S. states submitted qualifying round essays affirming or negating the IPPF topic, “Resolved: Governments should provide a universal basic income.”
As the new IPPF World Champion, the Westwood team receives a $10,000 grand prize ($5,000 for the school’s debate program and $5,000 in individual scholarships). The team was coached by Dominic Henderson, and the team members were Ethan Andrew, Pranav Balakrishnan, Eric Gong, Ayush Deo Tripathi, and Eric Zhu.
“These students were, in a word, outstanding,” says William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer Foundation and a founder of the IPPF. “They demonstrated a command of the subject matter and unparalleled advocacy skills – earning the title of IPPF World Champion.”
In New York, Westwood advanced over Damien Memorial School from Honolulu, Hawaii, in the quarterfinal round and Davidson Academy of Nevada from Reno, Nevada, in the semifinal round, before facing Ivy Bridge Academy from Johns Creek, Georgia, in the finals.
The runner-up team, Ivy Bridge Academy, receives a $5,000 prize. Coached by Dr. Michael Hester, the team members were Aanya Baddela, Alyssa Chen, Saanvi Kadiyala, Sanjana Kadiyala, Rajveer Nadkar, Ethan Nam, Claire Park, Sneha Ramineni, Rikhil Ranjit, Tessica Selvaganesan, Saanvi Sinha, Rithwik Tamilselvan, Olivia Tye, and Gene Yoon.
The top eight teams competing in the IPPF Finals represented schools from six U.S. states.
The IPPF Finals give students the opportunity to participate in oral debates in front of some of the world’s foremost experts in debate, business, law and politics.
The proceedings were judged by a panel comprised of Brewer, Miha Andric, an international debate coach and director of Education Center Argument, based in Slovenia; Will Baker, director of the NYU Global Debate Program; Sarah K. Cowan, founder and executive director of the Cash Transfer Lab and associate professor of Sociology at New York University; and Christina Phillips, director of debate at Notre Dame High School in Sherman Oaks, California. The debate moderator was David Baker, director of Admissions & Financial Aid at St. Mark’s School of Texas.
Rikhil Ranjit from Ivy Bridge Academy received the second annual John E. Sexton award, which honors an outstanding speaker in the final round as determined by the judges. The award is named after NYU President Emeritus Sexton, who serves on the IPPF Advisory Board.
Founded in 2001, the IPPF is the only competition that gives high school students from around the globe the opportunity – for free – to engage in written and oral debates on issues of public policy.
The 2023-24 competition began in October, as teams submitted qualifying round essays on the IPPF topic. Judges selected the “Round of 64” teams, who then participated in a single-elimination, written debate contest ― volleying essays back and forth via e-mail. From November to March, the field was narrowed from 64 teams to 32, then 16, and finally to the eight teams that competed in oral debates at the IPPF Finals in New York.
In New York, the quarterfinalists were Coppell High School from Coppell, Texas; Damien Memorial School from Honolulu, Hawaii; Grand Oaks High School from Spring, Texas; and West Anchorage High School from Anchorage, Alaska. Quarterfinalists each win $1,500.
The semifinalist teams — Davidson Academy of Nevada and Hamilton High School from Chandler, Arizona — each win $3,000.
The “Elite 8” teams participating in the IPPF Finals:
Coppell High School, Coppell, Texas
Damien Memorial School, Honolulu, Hawaii
Davidson Academy of Nevada, Reno, Nevada
Grand Oaks High School, Spring, Texas
Hamilton High School, Chandler, Arizona
Ivy Bridge Academy, Johns Creek, Georgia
West Anchorage High School, Anchorage, Alaska
Westwood High School, Austin, Texas
About the IPPF and the Brewer Foundation:
The IPPF was founded in 2001 by the Brewer Foundation and is now jointly administered with New York University. The program is available to all high schools around the world – public and private – for free. The IPPF is endorsed by leading forensic agencies, such as the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues, the International Debate Education Association, the Impact Coalition, Associated Leaders of Urban Debate Leagues, and the National Debate Coaches Association.
The Brewer Foundation is a private, non-profit organization funded by companies, individuals and the national litigation firm of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors. With offices in New York and Dallas, the Foundation has achieved widespread recognition for its efforts to create, fund and manage a variety of educational outreach programs.
Visit the IPPF at www.ippfdebate.com, www.facebook.com/ippfdebate, and Instagram at @ippfdebate.
The Reload: NRA Foundation Settles DC Lawsuit
April 18, 2024 – Reload editor and CNN contributor Stephen Gutowski today reported on the consent agreement between Brewer client the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), the NRA Foundation, and the District of Columbia Attorney General (DCAG).
According to the report, per terms of the consent order, the NRA Foundation will "adopt a conflict-of-interest policy, a board and officer compliance training program, and new standards for lending money or doing business with other NRA entities. It also agreed to limit loans to the NRA’s other operations to only charitable purposes in line with the group’s educational mission. However, it admitted no wrongdoing and avoided the more severe sanctions the AG initially sought to impose."
Gutowski wrote that the NRA disputes claims made by DCAG Brian Schwalb after the order was signed and "demanded he retract them in a letter to his office that was obtained by The Reload. It noted the lawsuit initially asked the court to appoint an overseer for the Foundation, a condition not included in the deal, and the Foundation didn’t admit to any wrongdoing in the settlement. It also asserted the NRA had agreed to pay back the Foundation for an outstanding loan before DC filed its lawsuit."
“The DCAG’ spins’ today’s settlement in avoidance of the facts: the DCAG long ago abandoned any claims of wrongdoing against the NRA,” William Brewer, the NRA’s outside counsel, said in a statement. “Even by DC standards, this is rank political gamesmanship – an after-the-fact justification for a failed lawsuit by these officials.”
The Hill Reports on NRA Settlement with DCAG
April 17, 2024 – The Hill reported today on a settlement agreement between Brewer client the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), the NRA Foundation, and the District of Columbia Attorney General (DCAG). The reporting includes comments from firm partner William Brewer, who responded to statements from DCAG Brian Schwalb as “distorted and untruthful.”
As stated by the NRA, “On April 16, 2024, the NRA and NRA Foundation entered into a consent order [resolving an August 2020 lawsuit], whereby the DCAG dismisses all claims against the NRA. The order contains no adverse finding against the NRA and no allegations regarding the use of funds of the NRA Foundation. There are no fines or penalties whatsoever against the NRA. DCAG Schwalb described the settlement differently.”
As reported by The Hill, the NRA also fought back against Schwalb’s characterization of the settlement in a statement to The Hill, with NRA counsel William Brewer calling it “distorted and untruthful.”
“The DCAG ‘spins’ today’s settlement in avoidance of the facts: the DCAG long ago abandoned any claims of wrongdoing against the NRA,” Brewer wrote. “Even by DC standards, this is rank political gamesmanship — an after-the-fact justification for a failed lawsuit by these officials.”
Brewer continued, claiming that many of the claims Schwalb alleged against the NRA Foundation were unfounded, specifically noting that the settlement agreement includes no accusations or implications of wrongdoing by the organization.
“In the face of these facts, the DCAG settled its lawsuit — abandoning all claims against the NRA and NRA Foundation,” he wrote.
Read more here.
Law360: NRA, LaPierre, Execs Seek to Ax Verdict
April 8, 2024 – Law360 reports that Brewer client the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is asking a New York judge to "throw out a Manhattan jury's verdict." A jury verdict was entered in the NYAG vs. NRA lawsuit on February 23, 2024.
According to the report, in its "motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the NRA argued that prosecutors did not prove that the organization itself failed to protect its charitable assets. The group said there was no proof at trial that its charitable assets, as opposed to noncharitable assets, were improperly administered, nor was there proof of a 'sustained or systematic failure of the board to exercise oversight.'"
"The trial record clearly demonstrates that the NRA was the victim of hidden arrangements and control overrides orchestrated by former insiders working with a handful of their favorite vendors," NRA attorney William A. Brewer III told Law360. "The record also demonstrates the NRA Board took swift, decisive action when it became aware of such conduct."
"The Board's commitment to good governance was on full display during the jury trial," he added. "The NRA appreciates the service of the jury, but believes it improperly attributed individual misconduct to the NRA. As such, the Association seeks judgment in its favor on all remaining counts."
Read the Law360 report (subscription required).