WASHINGTON — A federal court blocked a Republican-drawn congressional map from taking effect in Alabama Tuesday, throwing GOP plans to pick up an additional seat in the House of Representatives into doubt.
The three-judge district court panel ruled that the Supreme Court’s recent ruling limiting Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act doesn’t change their conclusion that the new map illegally discriminates against black voters.
“We now face a critical decision on a very tight timeline. We can either allow the Secretary of State to administer Alabama’s 2026 elections with a legislatively enacted districting plan that we found (after a full trial) intentionally discriminated … or we can issue a preliminary injunction,” the panel wrote.
“Ultimately, we cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.”
The trio included one Clinton-appointed appellate judge, Stanley Marcus, and two Trump-appointed district judges, Anna Manasco and Terry Moorer.
The decision requires Alabama to continue using a court-ordered congressional map from the 2024 cycle that contains one majority-black district and one so-called “black opportunity district.”
Republicans in the state had hoped to redraw the Second Congressional District, currently represented by Rep. Shomari Figures (D-Ala.).
Alabama officials appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, with state AG Steve Marshall calling the map “blandly unobjectionable.”
“Know this — in my mind, it is not a matter of whether we win this case, only when,” Marshall said in a statement.
The three-judge panel initially ruled in 2023 that the map intentionally diluted the voting power of black citizens, who make up slightly more than a quarter of Alabama’s population. The judges found that two of the state’s seven congressional districts should be majority-black or near-majority black. Both districts are represented by Democrats.
Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that a Louisiana map that featured two majority-black districts constituted an unconstitutional gerrymander and released an updated framework for determining violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which bans practices aimed at suppressing voters on the basis of race.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion that race-based redistricting can be used as a remedy for definitively proven civil rights violations, but redistricting for partisan purposes alone does not constitute wrongdoing.
The high court also agreed to lift the injunction that had blocked the Alabama map’s use and sent the case back to the three-judge panel for reconsideration
The jurists insisted Tuesday that it “carefully” evaluated the Supreme Court’s updated Voting Rights Act guidance in the Louisiana case before issuing their ruling.
“We emphasize that because of the exceptional public importance of this matter, we carefully reviewed the extensive evidentiary record in these cases with fresh eyes,” the panel wrote.
In the meantime, voters cast ballots in Alabama’s May 11 primaries, and Republican Gov. Kay Ivey set new special primaries for Aug. 11 in four congressional districts affected by the map switch.
With Post wires
Read the full article here