Court rules Alabama’s congressional map discriminates against Black voters


Summary

Court finds racial discrimination

A federal court ruled Alabama’s congressional map violated the Voting Rights Act, intentionally discriminating against Black voters by limiting their political representation.

Supreme Court ruling

Despite a Supreme Court ruling requiring a second majority-Black district, Alabama lawmakers passed a map with only one majority-Black district, leading to further legal challenges.

Court bans former map

The court mandated that the map used in Alabama's 2024 elections, which includes two majority-Black districts, must be used moving forward.


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Court finds racial discrimination

A federal court ruled Alabama’s congressional map violated the Voting Rights Act, intentionally discriminating against Black voters by limiting their political representation.

Supreme Court ruling

Despite a Supreme Court ruling requiring a second majority-Black district, Alabama lawmakers passed a map with only one majority-Black district, leading to further legal challenges.

Court bans former map

The court mandated that the map used in Alabama's 2024 elections, which includes two majority-Black districts, must be used moving forward.


Full story

Alabama, once the epicenter of the voting rights movement, is once again at the center of the conversation of racial discrimination in voting. A panel of federal judges ruled Thursday, May 8, that Alabama deliberately went against court orders and engaged in racial discrimination by refusing to create a second majority-Black congressional district.

Federal court rules in favor of Black voters, civil rights groups

A federal court permanently blocked Alabama’s 2023 congressional map, ruling it violated the Voting Rights Act. The legal battle centers around a congressional map drawn by Alabama lawmakers after the 2020 Census. The map, which split the state into seven districts, was criticized for drawing six of those districts to consist of majority white voters, despite Black residents making up 27% of the state’s population.

Unbiased. Straight Facts.TM

The 1965 Selma to Montgomery march is a defining moment in Alabama’s Civil Rights Movement. Led by figures like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the march followed the violent “Bloody Sunday” incident.

The Supreme Court allowed the map to be used for Alabama’s 2022 midterm elections but said it was unlawful, citing a lack of representation for Black voters. Despite this, Alabama lawmakers passed a new map a year later, maintaining only one majority-Black district.

The lawsuit, filed in 2021 by a coalition of Black voters and civil rights groups including the NAACP and Greater Birmingham Ministries, was backed by the ACLU and other legal teams. After a second trial, the federal judges ruled that the state intentionally ignored the law. They ordered that the map must now include two majority-Black districts.

The ruling draws on the historical challenge Black Alabamians have faced in securing political representation, explaining, “No other Alabama congressional district has elected a Black candidate in approximately 150 years, until District 2 elected Shomari Figures in 2024 under a court-ordered map.”

The court determined that the map used in Alabama’s 2024 election should now serve as the standard for future elections.

In response, the plaintiffs issued a statement saying, “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.”

Voting Rights Act of 1965

The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which aimed to eliminate racial discrimination in voting, was a key part of this case. By the end of 1965, more than 250,000 Black voters had been registered, and by 1966, only four Southern states had less than half of their Black population registered to vote.

The court’s ruling effectively bans the map used in Alabama’s 2023 elections and will reshape the state’s congressional districts moving forward. However, the judges acknowledged the progress in the treatment of Black residents in Alabama in recent years.

Harry Fogle (Video Editor) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , , , ,

Why this story matters

By the courts enforcing the creation of a second majority-Black district, the judges affirm the importance of the Voting Rights Act in ensuring fair representation.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 41 media outlets

Context corner

Alabama and other states in the South were previously subject to federal “preclearance” requirements under the Voting Rights Act due to historical discriminatory practices in voting. This oversight was significantly reduced by a 2013 Supreme Court decision, Shelby County v. Holder, allowing states greater autonomy in voting law changes up until recent judicial interventions.

History lesson

Alabama has a documented history of resistance to federal interventions on voting rights, especially during the civil rights era. Similar court interventions have occurred before; the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted in part due to such discriminatory practices. Recent changes to preclearance requirements made these newer court cases even more critical for ensuring representation.

Policy impact

The court's decision ensures lasting changes in Alabama’s congressional representation, establishing two districts where Black voters have a chance to elect their preferred candidates for the rest of the decade. Civil rights advocates argue this strengthens voting rights for minority groups, while state officials must now comply with federal orders, affecting state-level redistricting authority.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame Alabama’s redistricting ruling as a vivid indictment of systemic racial oppression, emphasizing “intentional discrimination” and linking the state’s defiance to the “darkest days of American history,” thus invoking a historic and emotional narrative of Black disenfranchisement.
  • Media outlets in the center adopt a more procedural tone, highlighting bipartisan judicial consensus and legislative maneuvers described as a “strategic attempt to checkmate the injunction,” de-emphasizing moral judgment in favor of legal process and political strategy.
  • Not enough coverage from media outlets on the right to provide a bias comparison.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

41 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • Federal judges ruled that Alabama intentionally diluted the voting strength of Black residents by not creating a second majority-Black congressional district.
  • The three-judge panel blocked Alabama from using a state-drawn map that violated the Voting Rights Act, emphasizing that the 2023 Plan unlawfully diluted Black voting power.
  • Black residents, making up about 27% of Alabama's population, had only one majority-Black district, while the state's second Black congressperson was elected in 2022, marking a historic milestone.
  • Deuel Ross from the Legal Defense Fund described the ruling as a testament to the resilience of Black voters in Alabama, acknowledging their long struggle for political equality.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • A federal court ruled on May 8, that Alabama intentionally diluted Black votes in its 2023 congressional map by failing to create a second majority-Black district.
  • This ruling stems from Alabama's refusal to comply with court orders following the 2020 census when it kept most districts majority white despite Black residents making up about 27% of the population.
  • The court-appointed map used in the 2024 election allowed Alabama to elect two Black representatives for the first time in 150 years, reflecting prior maps' unlawful vote dilution found by lower courts.
  • A unanimous three-judge panel stated the 2023 plan was deliberately designed to crack Black voters across districts and evaded clear court mandates, calling it "not a particularly close call."
  • The ruling could restore Alabama's oversight under the Voting Rights Act, requiring federal approval of future maps, and challengers hope it benefits Black voters statewide and nationally.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

  • No coverage from Lean Right sources 0 sources
  • No coverage from Right sources 0 sources
  • No coverage from Far Right sources 0 sources

Powered by Ground News™