‘Largest and Oldest’ Latino Civil Rights Organization Intervenes in Prop 50 Lawsuit

In a press release, The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) announced they have joined a lawsuit to defend California’s recently passed redistricting plan, Proposition 50. Prop 50 passed in November and was immediately challenged by The Dhillon Law Group, The California GOP, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The first hearing in federal court is scheduled for December 15. LULAC, “the largest and oldest Latino civil rights organization in the country,” has over 575,000 members nationwide, and more than 40,000 members in California.

“The plaintiffs in this case, including – sadly – our own Department of Justice, are callously targeting Latino communities who have fought tooth and nail to secure their right to vote and to have an equal opportunity to elect their candidates of choice,” said Roman Palomares, LULAC National President and Chairman.

“Their efforts to scapegoat the Latino community with these racially tinged arguments, while supporting efforts to gerrymander other states across the country in their favor, are both deeply insulting and dangerous,” added Juan Proaño, LULAC Chief Executive Officer.

In their motion to intervene, LULAC argues:

Plaintiffs’ claims are flatly contrary to law: each of the challenged districts is reasonably configured, neither Plaintiffs nor their experts identify any traditional redistricting principles that were subordinated, and there is nothing unconstitutional about a clearly partisan gerrymander that marginally increases Latino voting strength where there are longstanding communities of interest. Plaintiffs’ bizarre theory would effectively impose a presumption of unconstitutionality any time a districting plan creates majority-Latino districts—even when the map is drawn for reasons having nothing to do with race. That position weaponizes the very “stereotypes that treat individuals as the product of their race” that Plaintiffs claim to have brought this suit to protect, and would trample the constitutional rights of Latino voters

Plaintiffs’ attempt to detract focus from what is clearly a partisan gerrymander by targeting Latino voters is an affront to LULAC, its members, and the Latino communities who have had to fight tooth and nail to secure their right to vote and to have an equal opportunity to elect their candidates of choice. It is Plaintiffs who are expressly targeting communities based on their race, including longstanding, established, and compact Latino neighborhoods and communities in areas such as metropolitan Los Angeles and the Central Valley. To grant the relief Plaintiffs request would violate the very constitutional prohibitions Plaintiffs are pretending to vindicate.

As a leading nonpartisan, nonprofit, community-based organization, Applicant has a mission and purpose of fighting manipulative tactics like those of Plaintiffs order to ensure that Latinos are fairly represented and Latino communities are treated fairly in the political and redistricting processes.

The nonprofit takes great lengths to establish it is a nonpartisan organization due to it’s 501c(3) tax-exempt status, claiming:

Plaintiffs’ injection of supposed racial discrimination into a dispute over partisan gerrymandering profoundly impacts LULAC’s interests, which may not be adequately represented by Defendants. Defendants, governmental officials charged with representing not only the Hispanic community but indeed all Californians, could be subject to political winds that pressure them to resolve this case in a manner adverse to Applicant’s interests. For the same reason, the governmental Defendants cannot adequately represent the voices and interests of the communities and voters that Applicant works to specifically empower both in California and around the country. Similarly, Applicant’s interests may not be adequately represented by the other Intervenor-Defendant, the DCCC. The DCCC is an organ of the Democratic party, a partisan organization whose interests can diverge from those of Latino communities (which include those of many political parties), evident from the fact that LULAC has had to sue the Democratic Party in the past.

Since approximately 2021, LULAC affiliates have received over $15 million dollars through grants from the federal government, including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education. The nonprofit’s financials vary from approximately $2 million to $5 million, annually.

The press release reveals that “Democracy Defenders Action” filed the case on the nonprofit’s behalf. The DCCC is represented by the Elias Law Group, founded by Marc Elias.

Democracy Defenders was founded by none other than former President Obama’s legal counsel and “ethics” czar Norm Eisen, who admits in an interview he is not only engaged in lawfare by filing over 150 cases against the Trump administration, but that he is waging a color revolution. “Think of lawsuits, litigation, as the first guard rail [against autocracy],” he says. He then wildly claims Trump is an autocrat, despite winning in an electoral landslide, and that Hungary is an autocracy. Factually, Hungary is not. It just doesn’t allow the European Union and leftist globalists (like Eisen) to determine its government, its laws, or its borders.

Obama lawyer Norm Eisen just admitted to waging a Color Revolution against Trump as part of a years-long coup… pic.twitter.com/XqO38GNTQl

— Natalie Winters (@nataliegwinters) August 6, 2025

“It is a dark day in our country when the U.S. Department of Justice joins this kind of cynical effort to contort what is clearly a nonjusticiable, partisan gerrymander–designed to serve as a counterweight to Republican gerrymandering taking place across the country–into a racial gerrymander,” said Tianna Mays, legal director of Democracy Defenders Action. “The Trump administration encouraged other states to politically gerrymander their districts. They don’t get to turn around now and argue that California can’t use the same playbook simply because it no longer works in their favor.”

Dear Gavin Newsom,

I remember the day after the Prop 50 election where I sued you for the unconstitutional racial gerrymander of California. Your first comment about the lawsuit was that the case is going to fail. If you are so sure that the case is going to fail, why are you… pic.twitter.com/9eRCaMu0ZH

— Mark Meuser (@MarkMeuser) December 1, 2025

In response to LULAC and the DCCC intervening in the Prop 50 lawsuit, Attorney Mark Meuser fired back on social media, stating,

“I remember the day after the Prop 50 election where I sued you for the unconstitutional racial gerrymander of California. Your first comment about the lawsuit was that the case is going to fail. If you are so sure that the case is going to fail, why are you requiring 13 different attorneys at the California Attorney Generals office to work over the holiday weekend to defend your racial gerrymandered map?

If this case is such a loser, why has the DCCC intervened into the case and brought six more attorneys.

Furthermore, if this case is such a loser, why has LULAC intervened into the case and brought seven more attorneys.

I have a theory, maybe this case is not such a loser and you feel you need 26 lawyers just to try to have a chance to win the case.

Maybe, just maybe, you are actually scared that your racial gerrymander is about to be revealed to the entire world in open Court.

See you in Court on December 15th.”

The Globe will continue to provide updates on this legal battle.