In a surprise ruling on June 8, the Supreme Court ordered Alabama to redraw its congressional maps in accordance with the Voting Rights Act, after allegations that the districting suppressed the power of Black voters. The 5-4 verdict had Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining the three liberal justices, with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting. The ruling asserted the importance of the landmark piece of civil rights legislation and has implications for southern states across the country.
Roberts argued that Alabama’s maps violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which forbids lawmakers from creating voting practices that discriminate against minorities. The original maps confined Black voters to a single district, while allocating the other six to largely white, Republican voters. In doing so, lawmakers ignored the true purpose of redistricting in exchange for their political incentives.
The purpose of redistricting is to make sure voting maps accurately reflect the population, based on the Census conducted every ten years. By redrawing districts, state governments give everyone an equal opportunity to elect the Representatives of their choice. However, lawmakers have been known to subvert this process by gerrymandering: drawing borders around the area where the majority of a racial group or political affiliation is located. This approach leads to an oddly shaped map with one minority contained in a single district. Alabama is no stranger to gerrymandering: Alabama’s Black population has increased by over four hundred thousand since 1973, and the congressional maps have remained nearly identical over the course of the past fifty or more years. The Supreme Court’s ruling interrupts a process that could have continued indefinitely otherwise.
The decision will also uphold a lower court’s mandate to create a second majority-Black district, a win for Black voters.
However, there is still a long way to go before Alabama’s congressional map represents Black voters fairly. The way that voter power is redistributed remains an important concern for advocates. In a right-wing, majority-white legislature, where political interests and the requirements of the Supreme Court clash, one might wonder whether or not the map will be significantly altered at all. If the map is, it would likely be to the bare minimum demanded by the judges. Nevertheless, the implications of such change, however minimal, could result in the election of a second Black Representative, which would be a significant milestone in Alabamian politics.
The Alabama ruling also has broader implications: other states’ maps may be overturned in the future. Unfair redistricting isn’t just a problem in Alabama. It’s an issue that could potentially affect most southern states. In Louisiana, the Supreme Court recently stepped aside from hearing a case about the state’s congressional map, allowing a lower court to mandate a second majority-Black district to be drawn. The decision, which closely mirrored the Alabama ruling, dealt with allegations that the districting limited the influence Black voters had over congressional elections. The Supreme Court had initially planned to hear the case but reversed plans after the Alabama decision earlier that month. As a result, Louisiana is on track to add another majority-Black district before the 2024 election, securing Black voters fair representation in the near future.
Louisiana is just one example of how the decision regarding Alabama’s maps affects every state. South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas may also be influenced.
As someone who has lived in Alabama for most of my life, the recent rulings have given me hope that an increasingly polarized Supreme Court can make credible and fair decisions. In a country plagued by state legislatures with nearly unchecked power over federal elections, the Alabama ruling is a much needed change. My conservative state has a long history of doing all it can to avoid such change, and so does most of the south. Though belated, the Supreme Court’s decision is a welcome reminder that state legislatures do not have unlimited power over national elections, and that gerrymandering is a prevalent issue we should not ignore. I hope Alabama can be the catalyst for a much-needed revamp of congressional maps throughout the country.
Graphic by Julia Koeman
Comments