A federal court ruled that Alabama lawmakers intentionally disenfranchised Black voters by refusing to redraw the state congressional district map to include a second majority-Black district, despite receiving a previous order from federal judges.
In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that state lawmakers violated the Voting Rights Act after submitting a map that only contained one majority-Black district out of even in a state where approximately 28 percent of the population is Black.
That ruling came two years after civil rights groups sued the state, accusing lawmakers of crafting a disproportionate map in 2020 that disregarded the state’s makeup of Black voters. The Supreme Court initially permitted the map to be used for the state’s 2022 congressional elections, but later affirmed lower court rulings that determined it diluted the strength of Black voters.
Justices ordered state lawmakers to return to the drawing board and amend their congressional map with a second majority-Black district, but legislators only increased one district’s percentage of Black voters from 30 to 42.5 percent.
The new map was rejected by a federal court, and a judge appointed a special master to redraw Alabama congressional district lines to include two districts where Black voters have a feasible chance to elect a candidate of their choice.
The new temporary map resulted in the historic election of Rep. Shomari Figures in 2024, a Democrat who joined Alabama’s only other Black Congress member, Rep. Terri Sewell, in the U.S. House. Figures’ election to the U.S. House marked the first time two Black Congress members from Alabama served together in the state’s 150-year history.
On May 8, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Alabama ruled that the state must continue using the court-ordered map and reproached Alabama’s “deliberate decision to ignore” previous court orders, the Associated Press reported.
“The Legislature knew what federal law required and purposefully refused to provide it, in a strategic attempt to checkmate the injunction that ordered it,” they wrote. “It seems painfully obvious to us that the State’s decision to purposefully dilute the votes of Black Alabamians, particularly after exhausting its appellate rights for a preliminary injunction entered under Section Two, flies in the face of its position that Section Two has outlived the purpose Congress intended.”
“Today’s decision is a testament to the persistence and resilience of Black voters in Alabama, including our clients,” said Deuel Ross, deputy director of litigation at the Legal Defense Fund. “Alabama’s unprecedented defiance of the Supreme Court and the lower court orders harkens back to the darkest days of American history.”
Attorneys representing the civic organizations who filed the legal challenges against the state called the ruling a “testament to the persistence and resilience of Black voters in Alabama.”
“This win is a testament to the dedication and persistence of many generations of Black Alabamians who pursued political equality at great cost. We stand on the shoulders of our predecessors. We know that all Alabamians will benefit from today’s victory just as we have benefited from the work of others. We hope our win will benefit Black voters in the rest of the country as well. This is a triumph for voting rights, an independent judiciary, and offers us hope for the future of our democracy,” the plaintiffs wrote in a joint comment.
