Voters and key voting rights groups filed multiple lawsuits against Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana on Friday over his order to suspend the state’s House primary, arguing that he had overstepped his executive powers by delaying the election to give lawmakers time to draw a new congressional map.
The groups asked a state court to block the governor from suspending the House primary election that was scheduled for May 16. With early in-person voting set to begin on Saturday, the legal action could further upend Louisiana’s rapidly shifting election calendar amid a dizzying series of developments since the Supreme Court rejected Louisiana’s map as an illegal racial gerrymander.
On Thursday, Mr. Landry suspended the state’s congressional primary election under the governor’s emergency powers, saying that the existing map was no longer legal to use and that the Legislature needed time to craft new district lines.
“I think it’s fairly described as dramatic, where the governor is trying to change the election on Thursday, when early voting starts on Saturday,” said Sarah Brannon, a deputy director of the A.C.L.U.’s Voting Rights Project, which is representing the plaintiffs in the case.
The remaining races, including a highly competitive Senate primary, will continue as scheduled on May 16, with early voting set to proceed on Saturday. Secretary of State Nancy Landry, who is not related to the governor, said House races would remain on ballots, but votes cast for those primaries would not be counted.
Voting rights groups on Friday argued that the Supreme Court ruling did not qualify as an emergency under Louisiana law. Given that absentee ballots have already been requested and voters are already struggling to navigate a new closed-primary system, the groups warned against sowing further chaos and jeopardizing people’s right to vote.
“There is no threat to the safety of any voter as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision,” the lawsuit states. “This is evident in the fact that under the executive order, the May 16 primary election will go forward for all other races on the ballot.”
For individual voters who have already cast an absentee ballot, the lawsuit adds: “They would be deprived of their fundamental right to vote under the Louisiana Constitution if that vote was cast aside.”
The League of Women Voters of Louisiana, the Louisiana chapter of the N.A.A.C.P., the Power Coalition for Equity and Justice and a few individual voters joined together in the lawsuit. They are being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the A.C.L.U. of Louisiana and the Legal Defense Fund, some of the groups that were involved in the congressional redistricting case in Louisiana.
“It will create a lot of confusion and chaos,” not only for voters but also for candidates who might have to consider running in different districts, Ms. Brannon said.
Another lawsuit, filed by a local chapter of the National Council of Jewish Women and backed by the Elias Law Group and National Redistricting Foundation, pointed to previous rulings by the Supreme Court that prevented maps from being changed close to an election.
“Quite to the contrary, the Supreme Court has historically found that when voting in an election is within months of beginning — and, here, it has already begun — the state must proceed under the invalidated map, and any infirmities must be corrected for future elections,” the lawsuit said.
Eric Holder, a former attorney general of the United States who served in the Obama administration, accused Mr. Landry of playing politics with the court decision in a statement accompanying the lawsuit.
“Let’s be clear, there is no emergency here, only a rush to disenfranchise voters by deliberately misconstruing the horrendous ‘Callais’ decision,” Mr. Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court case. He added: “Politicians should not be changing election dates mid-voting because they fear the voters’ decision will not match their own personal or partisan desires.”
Both lawsuits were filed in state court in Baton Rouge.
A third lawsuit was filed in federal court late Thursday by Lindsay Garcia, a Democratic candidate for the Fifth Congressional District, and Eugene Collins, a voter in East Baton Rouge Parish.
That lawsuit echoed arguments that Mr. Landry’s order was unconstitutional, as well as concerns about “confusion, depressed turnout and the prospect of being turned away from polling places that no longer know which contests are open and which are closed.” Louisiana previously held open primaries where all candidates competed and the top two candidates advanced regardless of party affiliation.
On behalf of Black Louisiana voters, lawyers from the voting and civil rights groups asked the Supreme Court to delay its next procedural steps until after the 2026 midterm elections.
“Louisiana is following the law,” Mr. Landry said in a social media post on Friday, after at least one lawsuit had been filed. Attorney General Liz Murrill pledged she would “vigorously defend the State against any lawsuits seeking to block the lawful suspension of congressional elections.”
Louisiana’s congressional map has been snarled in litigation since the 2020 census, when lawmakers first reconsidered redistricting. A group of Black voters challenged lawmakers in the Legislature over the first map to emerge from that process, questioning whether a state where roughly a third of the population is Black should have more than one district with a majority of Black voters.
After a federal court ruled that the map was an illegal dilution of Black voting power, Mr. Landry oversaw the creation of a new one. That effort preserved an existing majority-Black district in and around New Orleans and created a new majority-Black district that snaked across the state from Baton Rouge to Shreveport.
The newer map not only preserved Louisiana’s most powerful Republican incumbents but also targeted then-Representative Garret Graves, a Republican who had endorsed a primary rival to Mr. Landry. In 2024, Representative Cleo Fields, a Democrat, won the seat.
