Lawyers in voter rights trial have clashed before, on different sides

LOS ANGELES -- R. Rex Parris and Marcellus McRae have met before.

The two litigators are facing off this month in the Santa Monica voter discrimination case with Parris representing plaintiffs and McRae defending Santa Monica against allegations the city's at-large voting system discriminates against Latinos.

A few years ago, their roles in another race discrimination case were much different.

Parris, in his capacity as mayor of Lancaster, was sued in 2011 for allegedly trying to drive out African-American and Latinos from Section 8 housing. One of the plaintiffs' attorneys was McRae, who represented the California State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

The federal lawsuit, also filed by the Antelope Valley Community Group against the cities and Housing Authority of Los Angeles County, alleged Parris spoke about a need "to go to war" against Section 8 housing and accused him of marshaling a campaign of harassment to get rid of federally-assisted tenants.

"The problem with Section 8 is that it's unbalanced," according to a news report in the lawsuit quoting Parris. "African-Americans comprise 78 percent of the recipients but are only 20 percent of the population. That's unfair," he said.

Parris told the Daily Journal when the lawsuit was filed that the matter had "nothing to do with race," saying there was a difference in philosophies of how public assistance should be dealt with.

In 2015, Lancaster and neighboring Palmdale settled for about $2 million, money paid by the housing authority. The cities said they were roped into the lawsuit merely for providing financial assistance to the housing authority to perform fraud investigations required under a federal voucher program.

R. Rex Parris

Now Parris and McRae's roles have flipped. McRae, a partner at for Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, is defending a discrimination case while Parris is prosecuting one. At the heart of it is the California Voting Rights Act of 2001. The plaintiff contends it only needs to show racially polarized voting while the defense said the plaintiff must also show voter dilution. Plaintiffs include the Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya, who lost an election in 2003 after garnering the most votes in the Pico neighborhood.

Plaintiffs say city minorities don't have representation, arguing only one Latino-surname has ascended to the city council in the 72 years since the inception of the at-large system. The defense claims that is sufficient, pointing to statistics that say the candidate of preference by Latinos has had a 77 percent election rate to the city council over the past 16 years. Pico Neighborhood Association et. al. v. City of Santa Monica, BC616804 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed April 12, 2016).

The city says its Latino voting population, 13.6 percent, is a small figure that supports its position that an at-large system is not discriminatory. The plaintiff said it's the law, not the statistics, that matters.

Parris, of Parris Law, is joined by Milton C. Grimes and Kevin Shenkman, the Malibu attorney who has sued municipalities across California to force changes in their election systems. The Santa Monica bench trial, a rare example of a city defending itself to the end, has taken deep dives into polling, racial identity, and voting history. Palmdale went to trial on similar grounds but ultimately settled.

Parris and McRae have butt heads a few times during the trial with Parris criticizing McRae for interjecting his closing argument with objections. McRae has made several objections to Parris' witness questioning and taken issue with some of his commentary on national politics.

Last week it turned personal while Parris objected to evidence submitted by McRae. McRae at one point called Parris "Parish," a mispronunciation that, intentional or not, was a humorous reference. Parris was accused as mayor of "growing a Christian community," according to a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Parris took issue with the name.

"Excuse me, my name is Parris, not Parish," he told McRae. "You know exactly what my name is."

"I actually don't," said McRae, adding later that Parris previously called him by the wrong name.

Meanwhile, plaintiff's witness Morgan Kousser, a social historian, remained on the stand after 11 days. The trial enters its fourth week on Monday.