Topline Takeaways

• SCOTUS has invalidated Alabama’s congressional district map due to racial gerrymandering. In its opinion, SCOTUS specified that legislators must draw a map with at least two minority-majority districts. This will likely lead to the election of a second Black Democrat from Alabama to the US House.

• The decision marks an enduring win for the Voting Rights Act as many feared that the conservative court might further invalidate sections of the legislation as they have in the past.

• The ruling sets the stage for several other racial gerrymandering cases pertaining to Southern states like Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina. Many now expect for SCOTUS to uphold the VRA in those cases as well, possibly leading to more House Republicans being replaced by Democrats following the enactment of new maps.

SCOTUS Rules on Alabama’s Map

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the map pictured above is an illegal racial gerrymander that must be remedied before the next election. This means that Alabama legislators will have to go back to the redistricting drawing board to create a new, fairer map. In the court’s opinion, it stated that legislators must draw two minority-majority districts to allow the state’s sizable Black popularion adequate representation in government. Due to the state’s clear racial divide in voting, it’s all but guaranteed that a Democrat will win the election in Alabama’s newly drawn seat. This will reduce House Republicans’ Alabama delegation from 6 to 5 members.

How Does This Impact The VRA?

In a suprise to many, SCOTUS’s ruling keeps the VRA in tact and leans on past precedent to guide its opinion. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s majority opinion and was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The shock swing vote came from conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who previously voted to allow Alabama to use the map in the 2022 elections while the case was being heard. Since the decision upholds the VRA, existing case law is largely unaffected and attention instead turns to the electoral implications in the wake of other racial gerrymandering cases.

How Will This Impact Other States?

Several states already have racial gerrymandering cases working their way through SCOTUS including Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina. While this case does not guarantee similar outcomes for those states, many are expecting the pattern to continue due to the similarities of those cases with Alabama’s. A crucial point in favor of the plaintiffs in Allen v. Milligan was Alabama’s undeniable history of racism in politics alongside a persistent racial voting divide. The same can be said about the rest of the states with outstanding racial gerrymandering cases as they are all Southern states with deep histories of disenfranchising of Black voters.

Let’s quickly entertain a best case scenario for Democrats: SCOTUS overturning maps for all seven states facing racial gerrymandering cases would likely lead to 7 Republican-held seats flipping to Democrats. Republicans currently hold a 9-seat majority in the US House, therefore SCOTUS could help put Democrats just two seats away from retaking the House.

Stick with Battleground to stay up to date as these cases work their way through SCOTUS!

Share Battleground