The recent dispute concerning Alabama’s electoral map has gained significant attention, as allegations of “racial gerrymandering” have led the case to the US Supreme Court. Originating from the case of Allen v. Milligan which began in November 2021, the spotlight has been on the way Alabama’s legislature drew their congressional districts. The denial of the Alabama Secretary of State’s emergency motion to use the contested maps and the ongoing appeal to the Supreme Court form the critical focal points in this case.
At the heart of the issue, Alabama’s congressional maps, notably the Livingston 3, show only one majority-Black district, District 7, despite Black residents forming nearly 27 percent of Alabama’s population according to US Census Bureau estimates. Critics argue that this layout “packs” most of the state’s Black population into a single district out of seven, an act viewed as racial gerrymandering.
The case, having previously reached the US Supreme Court, resulted in a judgement that found the plaintiffs were likely to succeed and that the proposed map possibly contravenes Section Two of the Voting Rights Act. Despite the Court’s finding, Alabama approved its proposed map that still contained only one majority-Black district.
In a more recent development, a panel of three judges enjoined Alabama from conducting elections with the proposed congressional map. In their view, the map, as it stands, still likely infringes on Section Two of the Voting Rights Act by diluting the votes of Black Alabamians. The court has tasked Richard Allen, acting as a Special Master, with an experienced redistricting team to draw up three proposed congressional maps by September 25, as detailed in their order.
This case reiterates the tensions between race, representation, and redistricting, and its outcome may greatly influence future court decisions and policies within not just Alabama but the nation at large.