Latest News

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for Alabama Republicans and their new voting map

The Supreme Court of the United States cleared the way for Alabama Republicans on Monday to pursue a congressional vote map that is more favorable to their political party ahead of the November midterm elections. This is the latest result from the court’s landmark voting rights ruling. The Supreme Court overturned a lower court decision that blocked the state Republicans' preferred map for being racially biased and illegally diluting voting power among Black Alabamians. Politically conservative Southern states are expected to revert back to the previous map. This would reduce the number of districts in which Black voters make up a majority or near-majority from two to just one of the seven U.S. House district of the state. The Republicans could benefit from using the old map. The conservative majority of the nine-member court was responsible for this order. Three liberal justices dissented, suggesting that the lower court should reapply the judicial block on the Alabama Republicans' preferred maps. The Republican Party of President Donald Trump is fighting to keep control of both the House and the Senate in the midterms. Alabama is one of a number of Republican-led states which have sought to eliminate congressional districts with a majority of Black voters and increase their party's odds ahead of the midterm elections after the Supreme Court ruled that a key provision in the Voting Right Act was invalidated. Black voters are more likely to support Democratic candidates. In a landmark ruling on April 29, the court struck down a map of Louisiana's second U.S. Congress district with a majority of Black voters. The majority ruled that the new map relied too heavily upon race, violating the equal protection principle of the constitution. Alabama filed an emergency motion after the Supreme Court decision asking for permission to return to an old map that only had one district with a majority of Black voters. Alabama, where Black voters account for a quarter, was ordered by a lower-court to use a district map with two districts that are majority Black. Both are held by Black Democrats. The lower court ruled that a previous map intentionally discriminated against Blacks and unlawfully dilute their voting power. Alabama officials argued that the court-ordered Alabama map had constitutional flaws similar to Louisiana's.

Steve Marshall, Alabama's Republican Attorney-General, called the order of Monday a "major win at the U.S. Supreme Court" in a post on social media.

Marshall wrote: "For far too long, federal judges who are not elected have had more influence over Alabama's election than Alabama's electors." "That's over now."

Deuel ROSS, an attorney at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, who represents a plaintiff group in the case, stated that his clients are "deeply dissatisfied" with the Supreme Court's decision to temporarily allow Alabama to use a map which is intentionally discriminatory.

Ross stated that "the court's ruling interferes with the ongoing election, and casts doubt on the validity of thousands of early votes." "We will explore all options to restore the court-ordered maps and protect the voting rights of the voters," Ross said.

DISSENT SUGGESTS LOWER COURT CAN AGAIN BLOCK NEW MAP

Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal Justice from the United States, argued in a dissent that the ruling of the lower court concerning Alabama's electoral map was more extensive than the Louisiana case and that it included findings of unconstitutional racism by deliberately diluting Black voters' votes in Alabama. Sotomayor, joined by two other liberal justices in a dissenting opinion, wrote that the?majority decision to overturn the lower court ruling was "inappropriate" and would cause confusion when Alabamians vote in elections scheduled to take place next week. She stated that the lower court was "free on remand" to determine whether Callais had any impact on its Fourteenth Amendment analyses or if their prior reasoning is unaffected. This was referring to Louisiana v. Callais, a decision of the court dated April 29, 2019. The court upheld a lower court decision in 2023 that the state's Republican drawn electoral map dilutes Black voters' powers, and violates the Voting Right Act. This 5-4 'ruling' was written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative Justice from the court and three liberal justices. Redistricting is a process that redraws the boundaries of the legislative districts in the United States to reflect the population changes measured by the 10 year national census. State legislatures typically redistrict once every decade. Republicans and Democrats are engaged in a multi-state redistricting battle that was ignited by Trump's unprecedented mid-decade initiative to redraw the maps of Republican-led state, starting with Texas.

(source: Reuters)