Court rules Alabama congressional map intentionally discriminated against Black voters
A three-judge panel said the congressional map drawn by the 2023 Alabama legislature violated the Voting Rights Act. The judges, which ruled against the state twice before and put a new map in place for last year's elections, have permanently blocked Alabama from using the state-drawn map.
The judges said the court does not 'diminish the substantial improvements Alabama has made in its official treatment of Black Alabamians in recent decades.
'Yet we cannot reconcile the State's intentional decision to discriminate in drawing its congressional districts with its position that Alabama has finally closed out its repugnant history of official discrimination involving voting rights,' they added.
The court will now consider whether to place Alabama under Provision 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which would require the state to get federal approval of its congressional plans.
Following the 2020 census, Alabama made six of its seven districts majority white, despite 27 percent of the state's population is Black.
Though the Supreme Court allowed the map to be used in the 2022 midterms, it also upheld the lower courts findings that the map unlawfully diluted Black votes.
Despite the rulings, the state legislature refused to redraw the map to include a second congressional district that would allow Black voters to elect the candidate of their choice.
'This record thus leaves us in no doubt that the purpose of the design of the 2023 Plan was to crack Black voters across congressional districts in a manner that makes it impossible to create two districts in which they have an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, and thereby intentionally perpetuate the discriminatory effects of the 2021 Plan,' the judges said Thursday.
'The Legislature knew what federal law required and purposefully refused to provide it, in a strategic attempt to checkmate the injunction that ordered it,' they wrote.
Plaintiffs in the case told the Associated Press the ruling is 'a testament to the dedication and persistence of many generations of Black Alabamians who pursued political equality at great cost.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Democrats hear some criticism as redistricting talk picks up
Outside groups are raising concerns that Democrats risk violating the Voting Rights Act with redistricting plans, creating a new problem for the party as it seeks to answer GOP efforts to redistrict its way to more power. Democrats say they have to take action to draw new House districts in states they control in response to power plays by a Trump-driven GOP in Texas and other states. But the tit-for-tat has left groups leaving the door open to litigation. They also are making a moral case, arguing Democrats are thwarting the democratic process. 'This is dead wrong from a democracy perspective, I think it's very problematic for Democrats from a political strategic perspective,' explained Dan Vicuna, director of voting and fair representation at Common Cause. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is the only Democratic governor so far to signal he's considering several ways to counter the GOP's efforts in Texas. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Newsom said any move by California 'is predicated on Texas moving forward' with its own redistricting plan, which some have seen as a way for the Lone Star State to make it more likely to hold on to five House seats. Several other Democratic governors, including Govs. Kathy Hochul of New York, Phil Murphy of New Jersey and JB Pritzker of Illinois have left the door open to possibly changing their maps. The GOP may also not be done. The White House is reportedly pushing Missouri to consider redrawing its map. Civil rights and voting groups are worried actions by both parties could undermine or weaken the political power of historically marginalized minority communities. The issue is a thorny one for Democrats, who have positioned themselves as the prodemocracy party and championed racial justice initiatives. At the same time, Democratic states just like Republican states have been sued by civil rights groups over Voting Rights Act violations. Both Democrats and Republicans have also been found guilty of creating gerrymandered maps. 'We have sued both Democrats and Republicans on these issues,' said Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 'So yes, we are concerned that when leaders of either party seek to take maximum advantage, partisan advantage of redistricting, they often neglect, if not ignore, the imperatives of the Voting Rights Act with respect to reliably Democratic voting groups.' Some groups are also frustrated given efforts by blue states to move beyond gerrymandering. 'Independent commissions like the gold standard in California were created specifically to avoid what's being considered here, which is voting maps drawn for the sole purpose of protecting incumbent politicians and political party interests to the exclusion of community needs and community feedback,' Vicuna said. California Common Cause was intimately involved in the creation of California's independent commission. It could be difficult for some Democratic-held states to answer Texas. Several would likely need to change their state constitution and work around their respective redistricting commissions. Should the Lone Star State craft new House lines, John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, in a statement said they would be met 'with a wall of resistance and a wave of legal challenges.' His statement did not address Democratic-led states mulling their own midcycle redistricting. Democrats argue that if Republicans are headed down that road, nothing should be off the table for them as well. 'Republicans should be careful what they ask for,' Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), chair of the House Democrats' campaign arm, told The Hill in a statement. 'And if they go down this path? Absolutely folks are going to respond across the country. We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people.' Democrats are also leaning into the issue of democracy, saying the longevity of the country is at stake if the party does not respond. Newsom painted the situation in grim terms, saying on Friday, 'I believe that the people of the state of California understand what's at stake. If we don't put a stake into the heart of this administration, there may not be an election in 2028.' 'We can sit back and act as if we have some moral superiority and watch this 249, almost 250-year experiment be washed away,' Newsom said. 'We are not going to allow that to happen. We have agency, we can shape the future.' Civil rights and voting-focused groups, however, are concerned about the ramifications midcycle redistricting could have moving forward, including the possibility of what was once considered a decennial process after each U.S. census turning into a cyclical issue. 'One of the concerns that we have is, even if blue states have power and have a majority in their legislature to redraw maps, our concern is that this could set a bad precedent, because those states could, at the same time, flip in the future,' said Jose Barrera Novoa, vice president of the far west for the League of United Latin American Citizens. 'And the same thing is going to happen where … other parties are going to look to redraw the map midcycle or even quarterly. Who knows?' he asked. 'It's all hypothetical, yet it's still very possible.' Not only could a potential redistricting tit-for-tat raise questions over whether this could be repeated in the future, experts also worry about the financial toll it could take on their resources and voters themselves. 'These are judges managing these cases, hearing these cases. Many of these people are paid out by state funds, and federal cases, of course, are also paid by voters directly,' explained Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, noting cases that use taxpayer funds. 'Do we really want to spend this time doing this highly unusual activity when we're all going to have to pay for it?'
Fox News
3 hours ago
- Fox News
RILEY GAINES: Trump did right thing with DOE cuts, now Congress needs to get in the game
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court gave the green light for his administration to slash nearly a third of the Department of Education's workforce. It's a big (and long overdue) step toward reining in decades of federal overreach that's taken power away from parents and local communities. Here's what happened: The Court lifted a lower court's block on Trump's executive order, which directed Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to start shutting the department down and returning control of education to the states. Essential services would stay intact. But the bloated bureaucracy? That's on the chopping block. And it should be. For years, the Department of Education has acted less like a support system and more like a control center. With around 4,000 employees, its main tasks have included writing regulations, managing student loans, and overseeing grants. Even its PR office has 89 staffers and costs taxpayers over $10 million a year. A quick number crunch shows a pretty glamorous salary for a not-so-glamorous job. That money's not going to raise reading scores or teach kids about the Constitution, that's for sure. That's why this restructuring matters. Student loan management is being handed over to the Treasury Department, where it belongs. A simplified repayment and collection system is already in motion. Meanwhile, other functions of the DOE are being reassigned to smaller, more efficient agencies. The goal? Streamline the system and put decision-making power back where it belongs: with parents and local authorities. Abolish the Department of Education entirely. But this is about more than just bureaucracy. It's about values. For years, bureaucrats in D.C. have decided what our kids learn, what values they're taught, and who's allowed to speak up in the classroom. That chapter is closing. Now it's time to restore education to the people it actually affects: families, teachers, and local leaders. For years, the DOE has pushed a radical agenda on schools across the country. In 2016, it sent a "Dear Colleague" letter to school districts, threatening to pull funding unless they allowed boys into girls' locker rooms, bathrooms, and sports teams. This wasn't about safety or fairness; it was about forcing schools to comply with a social ideology most parents never agreed to. Go back even further. This radicalization started under the Obama administration. In 2011, the DOE rewrote Title IX rules to lower due process standards in campus sexual harassment cases, leading to lawsuits and unjust expulsions. In 2014, it teamed up with the DOJ to pressure schools into enforcing racial discipline quotas regardless of whether actual discrimination existed. Teachers were forced to ignore disruptive behavior to avoid triggering federal investigations. And under Biden, it got worse. The DOE tried to expand Title IX to include "gender identity" and disregard "sex," pressuring schools to rewrite policies on housing, sports, and facilities until courts stepped in and said enough. None of these decisions came from Congress. They were mandates from unelected bureaucrats, better known as people you didn't vote for and can't hold accountable. That's not how a constitutional republic is supposed to work. Now, thanks to the Supreme Court, the door is open to real reform. Congress has the power to finish the job and eliminate the DOE for good. These layoffs are just the first move toward dismantling a department that has prioritized politics over education for far too long. For years, bureaucrats in D.C. have decided what our kids learn, what values they're taught, and who's allowed to speak up in the classroom. That chapter is closing. Now it's time to restore education to the people it actually affects: families, teachers, and local leaders. Local control means more freedom, better accountability, and real opportunities for students to succeed. It means pulling education out of Washington's grip and giving it back to the people who know their kids best. The Supreme Court did its part. Now it's Congress's turn. Let's finish what Trump started. Eliminate the Department of Education and build a system based on merit, fairness, and freedom. Our kids and, in turn, the future of America deserve nothing less. Editor's note: This column was first published on Outkick.
Epoch Times
3 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Trade Group Urges Supreme Court to Block State Law Restricting Minors' Access to Social Media
An internet trade association has asked the Supreme Court to prevent Mississippi from enforcing a law restricting minors' access to social media platforms. The law, known as House Bill 1126, regulates social media websites operating in the state. The statute requires minors to obtain parental consent to use the sites. It also requires platforms to verify users' age and imposes fines for non-compliance.
