Advocating for Democracy, One Case at a Time: Brewer's Commitment to Fair Representation in Texas

For 30 years, the Brewer Storefront, the community impact affiliate of our firm, has represented clients in litigation at the intersection of law and public service by using advocacy to strengthen communities and protect the democratic process.

Throughout its history, the Storefront has chosen clients across Texas willing to take on election systems that dilute minority voting strength and limit fair representation.

The History of the Brewer Storefront and Voting Rights Act Litigation

The Brewer Storefront’s advocacy under the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) has reshaped local democracy.

• Benavidez v. City of Irving - In 2009, the firm successfully challenged the City of Irving’s at-large voting system. The court found that the city’s electoral system violated Section 2 of the VRA because it prevented Hispanic residents from electing candidates of their choice. That decision laid the foundation for greater minority representation in one of North Texas’s fastest-growing cities.

• Fabela v. City of Farmers Branch - Three years later, in 2012, the Storefront prevailed when the court struck down another at-large system. The result was transformative: Farmers Branch saw the election of its first Latina City Council member, an historic milestone for the community and a testament to the power of principled litigation.

• Rodriguez v. City of Grand Prairie - In 2015, the Storefront secured another favorable outcome when the City of Grand Prairie agreed to settle the lawsuit, redrawing the City Council district boundaries to expand opportunities for minority candidates. One of those redrawn districts has been continuously represented by a Hispanic council member since.

In addition to those campaigns, cases brought by the Storefront drove meaningful reforms in school district governance.

• Rodriguez v. Grand Prairie ISD – In 2013, the Storefront successfully challenged the Grand Prairie ISD’s school board election system. The settlement agreement established a new election system with five single-member districts and two at-large seats. Since 2015, a Hispanic candidate has held a seat on the board.

• Ramos v. Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD - In 2015, the Storefront secured the adoption of a cumulative voting system in the Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD, a forward-looking reform that allowed minority voters to coalesce behind candidates of their choice without dividing communities along racial lines.

• Tyson v. Richardson ISD - In 2019, the Storefront helped negotiate settlements that replaced outdated at-large voting systems with hybrid structures comprising five single-member districts and two at-large seats, ensuring both community-based representation and continuity in leadership.

Advocating to Expand the Law

• Vaughan v. Lewisville ISD - In Vaughan, the Brewer Storefront advanced a core principle that animates its civil rights work: remedial statutes like the Voting Rights Act should be construed to allow meaningful enforcement by those harmed by discriminatory systems. The Storefront advanced the argument that any citizen who is engaged in local governance and aggrieved by an unlawful electoral structure can seek relief — even when that citizen is not a member of the minority group most directly burdened by the system. The Plaintiff, a white voter, alleged that the district’s at-large election scheme distorted representation, undermined community trust, and perpetuated discriminatory effects that harmed the district. The Storefront brought the case deliberately, recognizing that durable civil rights protections depend on courts allowing citizens to challenge systemic inequities wherever they arise.

  Although the district court granted summary judgment for defendants and imposed sanctions and attorneys’ fees against the firm, the Fifth Circuit reversed course on appeal, vacating the sanctions in their entirety. The appellate court made clear that advancing an unsettled legal theory — particularly one grounded in good-faith interpretation of a civil rights statute — is not sanctionable simply because a court ultimately disagrees. That ruling reinforced an essential safeguard for public-interest advocacy: the law will only evolve if lawyers are permitted to test its boundaries without fear of punishment. Vaughan stands as a reminder that expanding access to justice sometimes requires principled risk, and that civil rights progress depends not only on winning cases, but on preserving the freedom to bring them.

• Dixon v. Lewisville ISD – In 2023 the Storefront filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas alleging the school district’s at-large election system violated Section 2 of the VRA by diluting the votes of minority voters. The case was resolved through settlement, creating a new election structure with five single-member districts and two at-large seats.  

The Impact of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act

Core to this work is Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, an important safeguard against electoral systems that deny minority voters an opportunity to participate in the political process. The law prohibits any election practice that results in vote dilution, whether by design or by effect. Traditionally, courts have applied the framework adopted by the Supreme Court in Thornburg v. Gingles which requires plaintiffs to show that minority voters could form a majority in a single-member district to prove a violation. 

The Storefront has brought many claims under the Gingles framework. In challenging voting systems in communities which are racially segregated, the Gingles test can be an effective tool to correct a system (typically at-large) that allows the majority to exclude meaningful participation of other races. However, more recently we have advanced an alternative understanding of Section 2 — one that reflects the realities of increasingly diverse communities, but where racial polarization still exists. Empirical data shows that as communities integrate, racial polarization in voting still persists. Geographic compactness, once seen as a prerequisite for relief, should not bar the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act when discrimination manifests in equally harmful forms. Brewer Storefront continues to argue that the totality of the circumstances must guide courts in identifying inequities and crafting remedies that restore meaningful representation as commanded by Congress in the plain text of the VRA.

The Storefront is now pursuing this advocacy in Vallejo v. Keller Independent School District. The lawsuit challenges Keller ISD’s at-large electoral system, which has excluded Hispanic voters from meaningful participation in board elections for decades. Although Hispanic residents make up over 15% of the district’s citizen voting-age population, no Hispanic candidate has ever been elected to the school board in more than twenty-five years. The suit argues that this imbalance is not simply a demographic accident but the result of a system that allows a white voting bloc to dominate outcomes, leaving large segments of the community unrepresented.

The complaint proposes a remedy rooted in both fairness and constitutional soundness: the adoption of a cumulative voting system. Under such a system, voters cast multiple votes that they can allocate among candidates however they choose. This approach would empower cohesive minority communities to elect candidates of their choice without requiring racial gerrymandering or the creation of majority-minority districts. It also sidesteps the tension between the Equal Protection Clause and the Voting Rights Act that critics often cite to challenge the latter’s effectiveness.

Cumulative voting provides an elegant, race-neutral solution that aligns representation with the evolving diversity of Texas communities. It is a reform that balances constitutional principles with democratic inclusion, precisely the kind of structural innovation Brewer Storefront has long championed.

Across every case, one theme remains constant: The Brewer Storefront does not take sides in partisan battles. Its work defends the process itself by ensuring that every community, regardless of political affiliation or racial makeup, provides fair access through the ballot box to fair opportunities. The Storefront’s advocacy has prompted cities and school districts across Texas to adopt more representative systems that mirror the people they serve.

These efforts go beyond courtroom victories. Each case represents a reaffirmation of democratic values: accountability, inclusivity, and fairness. The Storefront’s work has helped shape public policy, educate communities, and model how principled legal advocacy can strengthen the foundation of self-government.

As the Brewer Storefront continues its pursuit of justice in Keller ISD and beyond, its mission endures: to ensure that every vote counts and every voice is heard. Through cumulative voting and other innovative reforms, the Storefront seeks to modernize electoral systems to reflect the pluralism of twenty-first-century Texas.

Democracy thrives when institutions are fair. The Brewer Storefront’s legacy in Voting Rights Act litigation demonstrates that the law, when wielded with conviction, remains a powerful instrument for equality. The firm’s ongoing work reminds us that defending the integrity of the electoral process should not be about politics — it’s about principles. And those principles will guide the Brewer Storefront as it stands for the rights of all Texans to be seen, heard, and represented.