Supreme Court hands Alabama major boost in redistricting fight – The Washington Post
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a significant victory to Alabama this week, intervening in the state's contentious congressional redistricting battle. The high court's decision effectively pauses a lower court order that would have mandated the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district, allowing Alabama's legislature-drawn map to proceed for the upcoming 2024 election cycle. This move marks a notable development in the ongoing legal saga surrounding racial representation and the Voting Rights Act.
Background: A Prolonged Legal Challenge
The dispute over Alabama's congressional map traces back to the 2020 census, which showed the state's population as approximately 27% Black. Following the census data, the Alabama Legislature drew new district lines in 2021 for its seven U.S. House seats. This initial map featured only one district, District 7, where Black voters constituted a majority and could reliably elect their preferred candidates.
The 2021 Map and Initial Challenges
Almost immediately after its adoption, the 2021 map faced legal challenges from civil rights groups and individual voters. These lawsuits, consolidated into *Milligan v. Merrill* (later *Allen v. Milligan*), argued that the map diluted the voting power of Black Alabamians, violating Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). Section 2 prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. Plaintiffs contended that given the state's significant Black population, it was possible and legally required to draw a second district where Black voters had an opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice.
Supreme Court’s Previous Intervention: Allen v. Milligan
In January 2022, a three-judge federal panel, including two Trump appointees, sided with the plaintiffs. The panel found that the 2021 map likely violated Section 2 of the VRA and ordered the state to draw a new map with two majority-Black or Black-plurality districts. Alabama immediately appealed this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which issued a stay on the lower court's order, allowing the 2021 map to be used for the 2022 midterm elections.
The Supreme Court then heard arguments in *Allen v. Milligan* in October 2022. In a surprising 5-4 ruling issued in June 2023, the conservative-majority Court affirmed the lower court's finding. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, concluded that the lower court had correctly applied the existing legal framework for Section 2 claims and that Alabama's map likely diluted Black voting power. The Court sent the case back to the lower court, reaffirming the need for a remedial map that complied with the VRA. This decision was widely seen as a significant victory for voting rights advocates and a reaffirmation of the VRA's protections.
Key Developments: Alabama’s Second Attempt and Renewed Litigation
Following the Supreme Court's June 2023 mandate, the Alabama Legislature convened a special session in July 2023 to redraw the congressional map. Despite the clear directive to create a second district where Black voters could elect their preferred candidate, the Legislature passed a new map that still contained only one majority-Black district (District 7). While the new map slightly increased the Black voting age population in District 2 to approximately 39.9%, it fell short of the 50% threshold typically considered necessary for Black voters to elect their candidate of choice in Alabama's racially polarized voting environment.
Lower Court Rejection and Special Master Appointment
The plaintiffs quickly challenged this second map, arguing that it once again failed to comply with the Supreme Court's order and the VRA. In September 2023, the same three-judge federal panel that had ruled against Alabama previously again rejected the state's revised map. The panel found that the Legislature had defied its instructions and the Supreme Court's ruling. It stated that the new map "plainly fails to remedy the Section 2 violation we previously identified." To ensure compliance, the panel appointed a special master to draw three new remedial maps for the court's consideration, aiming to create two districts where Black voters would have a realistic opportunity to elect their preferred candidates. The court set a deadline for implementing one of these court-drawn maps for the 2024 elections.
The High Court’s Latest Order
Alabama appealed this latest ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a terse, unsigned order issued on Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted Alabama's request to stay the lower court's injunction. This means the court-ordered remedial maps will not be implemented for the 2024 election cycle. Instead, Alabama's legislature-drawn map, with its single majority-Black district, will be used. The Supreme Court's order did not provide extensive reasoning, simply noting that the stay would remain in effect "pending further order of the Court." This suggests the Court may still fully review the merits of Alabama's second map at a later date, but for now, the state has prevailed in its immediate goal. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson reportedly dissented from the decision to grant the stay, signaling their disagreement with allowing the current map to stand.
Impact: Electoral Landscape and VRA Enforcement
The Supreme Court's latest decision carries profound implications for Alabama's electoral landscape and the broader enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
Electoral Landscape Shift
For the 2024 elections, the use of Alabama's legislature-drawn map will likely maintain the state's existing partisan balance in the U.S. House of Representatives. Republicans currently hold six of Alabama's seven congressional seats, with District 7 being the only Democratic-held seat. A second majority-Black district would almost certainly have led to a second Democratic seat, shifting the state's delegation to 5-2 in favor of Republicans. This ruling preserves the 6-1 Republican advantage, impacting the national balance of power in a closely divided Congress. Black voters in Alabama, who constitute a significant portion of the Democratic base, will continue to have their voting power concentrated in a single district, diminishing their collective influence across the state.
Implications for Voting Rights Act Enforcement
Legal experts are carefully scrutinizing the Supreme Court's decision. While the Court previously affirmed the lower court's VRA interpretation in *Allen v. Milligan*, this latest action raises questions about the practical enforcement of that ruling. Some civil rights advocates express concern that the Court's stay, without detailed justification, could embolden states to draw maps that push the boundaries of VRA compliance, relying on the possibility of a sympathetic hearing from the Supreme Court. Conversely, proponents of the state's map argue that the VRA should not compel states to prioritize race in drawing districts to the extent that it leads to contorted or non-compact districts. The ongoing legal back-and-forth highlights the complex and often politically charged nature of applying the VRA to modern redistricting.
What Next: 2024 Elections and Future Legal Battles
The immediate consequence of the Supreme Court's stay is that Alabama's current congressional map will be used for the 2024 primary and general elections. Candidates will file and campaign under these district lines, which have been subject to intense legal scrutiny for years.
Upcoming Elections
Voter registration and candidate qualifying periods will proceed based on the boundaries established by the Alabama Legislature's second map. This means that the opportunity for Black voters to elect a second representative of their choice will be deferred, at least until after the 2024 election cycle. The focus will now shift to the individual races within these established districts, particularly in District 2, where the Black voting age population is substantial but not a majority.
Further Legal Challenges
While the stay is in effect for the 2024 elections, the underlying legal challenge to Alabama's map is not necessarily resolved. The Supreme Court's order explicitly states "pending further order of the Court," leaving open the possibility that the Court could still hear the full merits of the case regarding Alabama's second map. This could lead to another round of arguments and a final decision that either upholds or strikes down the state's current map for future election cycles. The legal battle over Alabama's congressional representation may extend well beyond 2024, potentially influencing the 2026 or 2030 redistricting cycles. The implications of this ruling could also resonate in other states, such as Louisiana and Georgia, which are facing similar redistricting lawsuits under Section 2 of the VRA.
