Supreme Court Gives Green Light to Alabama Redistricting Focused on Enhanced Black Voter Representation

26

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States sanctioned the creation of a revised congressional map in Alabama aimed at bolstering representation for Black voters. This redrawing of electoral districts may also offer Democrats an advantage in their bid to seize control of the House of Representatives.

The bench of justices unanimously dismissed the appeal from the State of Alabama to maintain the existing Republican-crafted electoral lines, which had previously been ruled against by a lower court.

By not intervening in the matter, the Supreme Court permitted the ongoing efforts of a court-appointed special master, who had unveiled three alternative plans on Monday. Each of these alternatives aims to establish a second congressional district where Black residents constitute a majority or near-majority of the voting-age populace.

The impetus for revising Alabama’s congressional districts stems from a June Supreme Court ruling. The Court found that the map, which was shaped according to 2020 census data and employed in the 2022 midterm elections, weakened the electoral influence of Black Alabamians. Given that over a quarter of Alabama’s population is Black, the extant map featured only one majority-Black district among seven total districts.

Related Articles

• Supreme Court to Determine if Alabama Can Delay New Congressional Map Drafting
• Legal Challengers in Voting Rights Case Advocate for Dismissal of Alabama’s Updated Congressional Map
• Discord Over Ideal District Shape as Alabama Hastens Congressional Redistricting

The creation of a second district with a Democratic-leaning, majority-Black voting population could potentially result in an additional Democrat securing a congressional seat. This comes at a crucial time, as Republicans currently maintain a precarious majority in the House of Representatives. Legal battles over redistricting are also underway in other states, including Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas.

In Alabama, racial factors markedly influence voting patterns; Black voters predominantly support Democratic candidates, whereas white voters generally lean Republican.

Evan Milligan, the lead complainant in the redistricting case, lauded the Supreme Court’s ruling as a “triumph for all citizens of Alabama,” stating that it moves the state closer to fair representation. Milligan affirmed the significance of the decision in a subsequent telephone interview.

The office of Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has yet to offer any remarks on the judicial decision.

A trio of judges will conduct a hearing next week to assess the proposed plans submitted by Richard Allen, the legal counsel designated by the judges for this matter. Allen’s proposed plans would modify the boundaries of Congressional District 2, resulting in a Black voting-age population ranging between 48.5% and 50.1%. Such a demographic shift could potentially place the seat within Democratic reach.

Contrastingly, the district formulated by Republican legislators, which was unanimously rejected by the panel of judges, had a Black voting-age populace of just 39.9%. According to simulations executed by those opposing the Republican scheme, this would have perpetuated the election of predominantly white Republican candidates.

The judicial panel declared that Alabama lawmakers had willfully ignored their instructions to establish a second district where Black voters could have a meaningful impact on election outcomes.

Evan Milligan and other Black Alabamians had contended that Alabama’s altered congressional map still marginalized Black-preferred candidates, restricting them to only one district currently represented by Rep. Terri Sewell, the lone Democrat and sole Black member of Alabama’s congressional delegation.

“The prevailing map essentially diluted the value of Black votes in Alabama,” said Milligan, emphasizing the imperative to contest this issue.

Alabama had aimed to implement the newly drawn districts while appealing the lower court’s decision, but failed to convince the Supreme Court.

Despite losing by a narrow 5-4 margin in June, Alabama had pinned its hopes on persuading Justice Brett Kavanaugh to change his stance. The state’s legal documents frequently cited a separate opinion by Kavanaugh from June, indicating his potential receptiveness to Alabama’s arguments under specific circumstances. Borrowing language from Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent, Kavanaugh asserted that although race-based redistricting might be permissible under the Voting Rights Act temporarily, such authority could not be indefinitely prolonged.

---

Contribution to this report was made by Big Big News writer Kim Chandler, reporting from Montgomery, Alabama.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Alabama Redistricting Supreme Court Decision

More about Alabama Redistricting Supreme Court Decision

• Supreme Court Ruling on Alabama Redistricting
• Overview of the Voting Rights Act
• Current Composition of the House of Representatives
• Legal Challenges in Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas
• The Role of Special Masters in Redistricting Cases
• Profile of Evan Milligan, Lead Plaintiff
• Prior Opinions by Justice Brett Kavanaugh on Redistricting
• The Demographics of Alabama According to the 2020 Census
• Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall’s Office
• Historical Context of Redistricting and Racial Representation