The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
Do No Harm v. Edwards
Overview
Plaintiff challenges a Louisiana law requiring the Governor to ensure that “at least every other member . . . shall be a minority appointee” for certain seats on the Board of Medical Examiners.
Details
The Governor asked the court to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the issue is now moot because the Governor issued a declaration stating they would not appoint individuals to the Board of Medical Examiners based on race or minority status. However, Plaintiff contends that the case is not moot because the underlying statute remains in effect and a future governor could still enforce it.
On January 30, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, asking the court to resolve the case without a trial. On February 20, 2025, Defendant opposed the motion, reiterating that there is no longer a legal issue for the court to resolve in light of the governor’s sworn declaration.
Court
U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana
Status
Filed January 04, 2024 | Ongoing
Topic
Government programsSignificance
This case is an example of the far-reaching impact of the Students for Fair Admissions decision, as plaintiffs are challenging many race-conscious requirements in the public sector.