SCOTUS Regulates Against Racist Gerrymandering in Alabama, Upholds Voting Rights Law

[ad_1]

In a decision that surprised legal experts across the country, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Thursday against congressional maps drawn in Alabama, saying they were the product of a racist gerrymandering.

Two justices from the conservative bloc, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined three members from the liberal bloc (Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson) to form the majority opinion in the case. . Roberts wrote the Court’s opinion.

Because of the numerous Voting Rights Act (VRA) restrictions that have been implemented in recent Supreme Court terms, the case was expected to result in a further restriction of the law. Instead, however, the ruling produced a “step backwards from the brink of total gutting” of the 1965 law, NPR reported.

The Court accepted a lower appeals court’s ruling that found Alabama officials unfairly crowded black voters into a majority-black district near the capital of Montgomery, diluting residents’ voting power blacks near this area by placing them in three other predominantly white neighborhoods. districts. Although black Alabamans make up about 27% of the state’s population, with only one majority black district, the maps have significantly reduced the ability of black voters to select lawmakers.

Alabama officials have argued that their maps were drawn in a racially neutral, and therefore constitutional, manner. Roberts and the majority, however, noted that Alabama was trying to create new benchmarks for drawing the districts, thwarting the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the 1980s.

Related story

Indigenous voters were undercounted in the 2020 census, now they are not fully represented in gerrymandered districts.

“The heart of these cases is not about the law as it exists. This is about Alabama’s attempt to remake our … jurisprudence again,” Roberts said in the majority opinion.

If the Court had adopted the “race-neutral benchmark,” Roberts wrote, it would be doing “badly” in practice, “which further advises us against adopting it.”

The appeals court initially ruled that a new map should be drawn, with a second majority-black (or near-majority) district to be drawn on it. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling and, following the ruling released Thursday, a second district with a majority of black voters will be part of Alabama’s congressional delegation going forward.

Even though he joined four other justices in opposing gerrymandered districts, Roberts left open the possibility, in his opinion, that the justices would further dilute the VRA in the future, writing that the majority decision does not “diminish or neglect” its curators and others. ‘ fear the law “could unacceptably elevate race in the distribution of political power within states”.

But the map drawn by Alabama lawmakers was not a “faithful application of precedent,” Roberts added.

Elie Mystal, justice correspondent for The Nation, took note of Roberts’ remarks.

“Roberts swung here because Alabama went too far,” Mystal wrote. “That Roberts has a ‘too far’ line on this issue IS surprising. But it doesn’t come to Jesus or anything.

The decision has the potential to extend to two other cases, one in Louisiana and the other in Georgia, in which black voters argued they deserved additional majority or near-majority districts due to gerrymandered maps. diluting their votes.

NAACP Legal Defense Fund litigation director Deuel Ross, who argued the case in court last fall, celebrated the ruling but acknowledged more work is needed to ensure meaningful voter representation in Alabama. and elsewhere.

In a statement, Ross said:

This decision is a crucial victory against the continuing onslaught of attacks on the right to vote. Alabama attempted to rewrite federal law saying race could not be considered in the redistricting process even if necessary to remedy racial discrimination. But due to the state’s sordid and well-documented pattern of persistent racial discrimination, race must be considered to ensure that communities of color are not left out of the electoral process.

Tish Gotell Faulks, legal director for the ACLU of Alabama, also celebrated the decision.

“The main finding of today’s decision is the courts’ recognition that the Alabama Legislature has knowingly continued its legacy by drawing illegal electoral districts that disenfranchise black voters. The Alabama Legislature must now draw new, more equitable electoral districts,” Gotell Faulks said.

Yes, we really want to say that your donation makes a difference.

Did you know that of the millions of people who read Truthout, less than 1% donate? But even with this small number of donors, Truthout is still heavily funded by donors. Every donation that reaches us has a disproportionate impact on each of our readers.

If you can find a few bucks here or there to support the always-honest, independent journalism we produce, please consider donating. All donations are tax deductible and go directly to fund our justice-focused work. Are you going to donate today?

This article is licensed under the Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.

[ad_2]