The Supreme Court on Monday allowed Alabama to implement its Congressional redistricting plan despite an ongoing legal challenge that accuses the Republican-led legislature’s map of racial gerrymandering.
In a 5-4 vote, the high court slapped down a ruling from a three-judge panel that had ordered the state to draw new maps for the 2022 elections over its diluting the Black vote.
Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh noted the majority’s move to allow the map to be implemented for now is not an ultimate decision on whether it runs afoul of federal law.
He said the district court had ordered a new redistricting map to be drawn in just a few weeks ahead of the 2022 elections, with absentee voting for primary elections set to begin next month.
“When an election is close at hand, the rules of the road must be clear and settled. Late judicial tinkering with election laws can lead to disruption and to unanticipated and unfair consequences for candidates, political parties, and voters, among others. It is one thing for a State on its own to toy with its election laws close to a State’s elections. But it is quite another thing for a federal court to swoop in and re-do a State’s election laws in the period close to an election,” he wrote.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., though, sided with the high court’s three liberal justices.
In his dissent, Chief Justice Roberts said he would have left the maps in place for the 2022 elections but allowed the court to hear the cases challenging the map next term.
While the high court batted down the district court’s order to draw up new maps, it did agree to hear the legal challenges and allow for oral arguments and thorough briefing before making an ultimate decision on whether it violates federal voting rights laws.
The court’s liberal wing would have left the lower court’s ruling intact.
Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, said the high court should not have second-guessed the record developed by the lower court.
“The District Court here did everything right under the law existing today. Staying its decision forces Black Alabamians to suffer what under that law is clear vote dilution,” she wrote.
Evan Milligan, the named plaintiff in the lawsuit, said he was disappointed by the court’s move.
“The fight for fair representation for Black voters in Alabama has been a winding road, generations long. However, during a month set aside to honor Black American history, we are reminded of the strength and dignity displayed by our ancestors who routinely confronted a wide variety of disappointments. We won’t dishonor their legacy by putting down the torch they have handed to us,” he said.
Tish Gotell Faulks, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama which represents the challengers, indicated that the group will continue the legal battle.
“The people of Alabama shouldn’t have to vote on a map in 2022 that we know is unfair, but we look forward to vindicating our claims at trial as the case continues in federal court,” she said.
Alabama Republican Party Chairman John Wahl welcomed the court’s move, saying it was a great victory for every congressional district.
“This election cycle had already started, and the Supreme Court agreed with Attorney General Steve Marshall and the Alabama Republican Party’s request to allow this primary to move forward without undue disruption. We want to thank AG Marshall and our talented legal team for the hard work that made this possible,” he said.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.