The Alabama Legislature Appropriately Revised by a High-Judgement Court of Law Against Redecision Decreeing 2021
This time, the judges decided not to give Alabama lawmakers another chance at mapmaking. The panel assigned a special master to work with a cartographer to deliver three potential maps. The Supreme Court rejected Alabama’s request for an appeal.
The legal tug-of-war over Alabama’s congressional map started shortly after the state redrew its districts in 2021. Only one of the state’s seven congressional seats was often won by candidates favored by Black voters.
While the plaintiffs largely supported two out of the three maps, the Alabama Democratic Conference said none of the options provided enough power for Black voters. Based on the party’s analysis, a white candidate preferred by Black voters could win under any of the maps, but a Black candidate would struggle.
Instead, in June the Supreme Court backed the lower court, with both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh siding with the court’s three liberals.
The Supreme Court gave Republican legislators a clear mandate when it said they should draw a second district in order to give black voters more power.
The judges were not swayed. In their decision, they said they were “disturbed” by Alabama’s actions and the state failing to “even nurture the ambition” to follow the court’s Supreme Court-backed order.
The judges made a decision to enforce the third map. There is a second majority-Black district on the map. There is a black voting-age population of 48.7%. But it did outperform the other two choices, with the Black-preferred candidate winning 16 of the 17 previous elections, according to the special master’s analysis.
The three-judge panel wrote that the plan was compliant with all the statutory and constitutional requirements and that it was being closely monitored to see how well it would work.
A case in Florida is in response to a map that was drawn to eliminate a voting district with a large Black population.
In Georgia, a federal judge has stated that some of the state’s maps likely violate federal law. Still, he’s running a trial to flesh out the facts.
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A New Mexico judge on Friday upheld the state’s congressional map as constitutional following a trial over whether the Democratic-controlled Legislature illegally drew the boundaries in 2021.
Judge Van Soelen found that evidence that the Democrats were trying to change votes in the 2nd Congressional District by moving conservative voters out and Democratic-aligned voters in.
New Mexico’s 2nd District previously encompassed the entire southern part of the state, including a portion of the oil-rich Permian Basin and vast agricultural land. There is a redrawn area with the exclusion of part of the eastern border with Texas and the addition of a heavily Hispanic and Democratic area of Albuquerque.
The Supreme Court of New Mexico made a decision earlier this year. It’s when it’s blatant that it goes against the state Constitution.
“Entrenchment is the touchstone of an egregious partisan gerrymander,” Van Soelen wrote in his decision. That is, Democrats would have to have such a strong hold on the district that they would always win. If the map itself, rather than voters, determined the district’s election results, it would violate the Republican plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to equal protection.
The parties in the case presented conflicting evidence about the competiveness of the district. So, Van Soelen based his ruling on the results of the 2022 election — the only time the map has been used.
The Republican Party of New Mexico said it would appeal to the state Supreme Court on behalf of all the voters who have not been able to cast a ballot.
The balance of power in the U.S. House could be affected by the ruling. And Vasquez and Herrell could square off in a rematch in the 2024 election.