The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an emergency bid from Alabama, setting the stage for a new congressional map likely to include a second Black majority district to account for the stateā€™s 27% Black population.

The one-line order reflects that the feelings on the court havenā€™t changed since June when a 5-4 Supreme Court affirmed a lower court that had ordered the state to redraw its seven-seat congressional map to include a second majority-Black district or ā€œsomething quite close to it.ā€

There were no noted dissents.

The case has been closely watched because after the courtā€™s June ruling, Alabama GOP lawmakers again approved a congressional map with only one majority-Black district, seemingly flouting the Supreme Courtā€™s decision that they provide more political representation for the stateā€™s Black residents.

    • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Itā€™s wild, but they basically already did. Thatā€™s what this decision was about. SCOTUS ordered Alabama to fix their map back in June, and Alabama just straight up ignored them.

    • MacGuffin94@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Ohio could do it because the ā€œindependentā€ redistricting commission is run by the governorā€™s son and is only bipartisan in that they were forced to allow democrats on by border initiative that changed the state constitution. Ohios maps didnā€™t have a SCOTUS ruling, just a state Supreme Court ruling and the GOP just had to wait out a year so they could shove a more conservative justice on than the one that was retiring and had sided with the liberal justices.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        I wonder if this would still hold in light of Alabama. If you can make the same case that this is diluting an ethnicityā€™s voting power, I think a court would have to overturn it. Especially since Alabama just got bitch slapped here by the court again.

        • MacGuffin94@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          Ā·
          1 year ago

          Ohio doesnā€™t have the racial demographic bunching that Alabama does, which from my understanding is who they were able to show easily that the appropriate maps could be drawn and even presented multiple appropriate maps in the Alabama lawsuit. Also Ohio did not sue because of racial gerrymandering, they sued because the maps violated the state constitution. Now that there is a new state SC and Dems did better in 2022 than expected Ohio dropped the suit because they wonā€™t win.

    • torknorggren@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      The court ordered that a special master draw the lines for the next election, so it sounds like theyā€™ve pre-empted the Ohio strategy.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      This is painful but we do have a constitutional mechanism for states that canā€™t figure their electoral shit out legally. Their representatives donā€™t get seated. And they donā€™t get electoral college ballots for president.

      Itā€™s a 200 year old can of political fuckery that we may just have to open.