In a recent 6-3 decision, the U.S Supreme Court upheld the redrawing of South Carolina’s District 1 congressional map, ruling that it did not unlawfully infringe upon the voting rights of Black citizens. Justice Alito delivered the majority opinion in the case of Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP.
South Carolina District 1 was reshaped after the latest demographic census. The Republican-controlled legislature’s primary aim was to solidify their party’s electoral power, leading to a significant redistribution of the Black populace within District 1 into multiple districts. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) argued that this constituted gerrymandering, challenging its constitutionality under the Fourteenth Amendment.
A tripartite panel of judges from the Columbia Division of the District of South Carolina originally ruled that redistricting District 1 was unconstitutional, finding that race was a prominent component in the redistribution and that a compelling state interest for such action was not demonstrated. The NAACP, however, failed to provide a map that would meet the legislature’s partisan objectives while maintaining a higher Black Voting Age Population (BVAP) in District 1. Justice Alito, in Alexander, ruled that this failure prevented the NAACP from demonstrating that race was a primary motivating factor, distinct from partisan politicking.
Chief Justice Roberts, along with Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, joined Justice Alito in this judgment. Justice Thomas concurred, except for Part III C. Justice Kagan, on the other hand, penned a dissenting opinion, firmly advocating for the original District Court’s findings.
Maya Wiley, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, denouncing it as a stark assault on the voting rights of Black people. She called the ruling a distressing misuse of power that disregarded the factual findings of the original court and has made contesting unconstitutional gerrymandering even more challenging.
Beyond South Carolina, the matter of congressional redistricting has been a point of conflict in multiple states following the 2020 census. The Missouri Supreme Court recently resolved disputes over their state’s redrawn map, deciding against claims of racial gerrymandering. Last year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered their states’ districts to be redrawn, not for reasons of racial gerrymandering, but due to detached territories within the current districts. The Supreme Court, on another occasion, rejected Alabama’s proposed map as racially influenced.