The state of Alabama finds itself at the nexus of an ongoing national debate over voting rights and racial gerrymandering. The state had been issued a court mandate, not only endorsed but also upheld by the Supreme Court, to create two majority-Black districts.
Despite the clarity of the court order, the state legislature, under GOP control, considered an alternative “compromise” map. This proposed map, supported by Alabama GOP Governor Kay Ivey, features only one majority-Black district. Governor Ivey has reaffirmed her trust in the state legislature’s understanding of the state’s citizens and districts, as opposed to the perceptions of federal courts or activist groups. She appreciated the legislature’s prompt response and progress made towards meeting the court’s deadline.
The state’s defiance did not go unnoticed, as a federal panel expressed significant frustration over the situation. However, Alabama chose to push back, going so far as to ask SCOTUS to block the lower court ruling while the state appealed.
However, the Supreme Court once again sided with civil rights activists and declined to block the lower court’s ruling without any commentary or public dissent. Essentially, this upheld the lower court’s demand for a second majority-Black district in the state of Alabama.
We are left wondering whether Alabama will comply with this latest court ruling. Previously, as reports indicate, both a federal panel and the courts had rejected Alabama’s repeated attempts to continue its practice of racial gerrymandering.
For further reading, consider revisiting some past pieces, including commentary on how Supreme Court decisions seem to matter to Republicans mostly when they align with their interests and a discussion on the challenges a Notre Dame Law Professor faced when counting to two.