The head of Louisiana’s Democratic Party, Katie Barnhardt, claims the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s race is “taking us back to a world reminiscent of Jim Crow, a world of exclusion, control, and violent inequality. During a phone interview on Thursday [Dec. 14], Barnhardt doubled down on the claims, insisting that Democrat Henry Whitehorn won the race fairly, by a single vote back in the November 18th runoff election. He faced Republican John Nickelson. The Shreveport attorney challenged the results in a lawsuit which ultimately led to the voiding of election results.
As for the public response to her comparison of the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s race to that of the “Jim Crow” era, she says, “I’m not really sure [if] anyone else has responded. My response this election is we are very proud to elect the first black man sheriff of Caddo Parish. He did win by a close margin, but he won, nonetheless. And it is, unfortunately, reminiscent of something we read about in the history books when that election is attempted to be taken away.”
Retired Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Joe Bleich was brought in to serve as an ad hoc district court judge for this case. And it was Bleich who ruled in Nickelson’s favor, saying it was impossible to figure out who won. Judge Bleich voided the November 18 results and ordered a new election. Earlier this week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeal upheld the lower court ruling. Whitehorn has vowed to take this case to the state supreme court, if necessary.
Barnhardt addressed concerns that invoking the history of Jim Crow only serves to inflame the public. “Oh, think people oughta be upset. I’m upset. And no, I didn’t say it to get people upset. But I think it’s calling the situation as it is. And I think it should be incredibly upset about this as many are.”
In Caddo Parish, Republican Party chair Louis Avallone delivered a one-word response to claims of a Jim Crow atmosphere, “Ridiculous.” Shreveport attorney and political analyst Royal Alexander had more than a few words to convey his view of the case. “Here, with a one-vote margin anything, even the most innocent error, could change the outcome. So, it’s working its way through the system with the challenges to elections allowed by law and we will see an answer sooner than later. But no, I don’t attribute or ascribe any sordid or dark or racial motivations to any of this. I do not.”
Court watchers point to one fact that is often overlooked – That Nickelson requested a full hand recount of the absentee ballots. That request was denied. Nickelson has cited that full recount rejection as a factor in his decision to file a lawsuit, to challenge the election results. Nickelson did so within hours after the partial recount resulted in the same one-vote margin.
