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 state’s 27% Black population.

The one-line order reflects that the feelings on the court haven’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 “something quite close to it.”

There were no noted dissents.

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

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    1 year ago

    When you have one of the most conservative SCs in history telling you to redraw the lines, you know shit’s fucked up. Alabama doesn’t care. It’s the armpit of the south. Sorry if you’re from Alabama, but you know what your state is.

      • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seriously though, I lived in Mobile and Mississippi was on another level.

        Alabama has Huntsville and Auburn and B’Ham that have genuinely good universities and some diversity.

        Mississippi has Brett Favre and Elvis. And Elvis moved the hell out as soon as he could.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        One of these days, Alabama will do something good of its own volition, and we won’t have to drag them kicking and screaming away from being racist.

        Some day.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also SCOTUS has been stacked to side with these people, but are taking plenty of heat for a while do this is for now, to prove they’re not corrupt pieces of garbage, until the slow businessmen’s plot completes.

    • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s wild, but they basically already did. That’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
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ohio could do it because the “independent” redistricting commission is run by the governor’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 didn’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
        ·
        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 ethnicity’s voting power, I think a court would have to overturn it. Especially since Alabama just got removed slapped here by the court again.

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

          Ohio doesn’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 won’t win.

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

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

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

      This is painful but we do have a constitutional mechanism for states that can’t figure their electoral shit out legally. Their representatives don’t get seated. And they don’t get electoral college ballots for president.

      It’s a 200 year old can of political fuckery that we may just have to open.

  • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    So to recap:

    AL: “Look these maps are totally fine”

    SCOTUS: “Nope, redraw them”

    AL: “You’re the last person I thought would say that, but alright fine. We’ve made adjustments to comply.”

    Another court: “No you didn’t, you just changed proportions in a way that’s unlikely to have any effect”

    AL: “Nah it’s totally fine!”

    Another court: “No it’s not. An independent entity will draw the maps since you racist fucks are incapable”

    AL: “That is unfair, these maps are fine! Tell them, SCOTUS!”

    SCOTUS: “Nope we’re not getting involved. The maps are still bad.”

    Seriously though I’m confused why the Court is being… agreeable.

    • Wenchette
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      “You’re the last person I thought would say that” 😂😂😂

    • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      They have enough bad press as it is. Don’t want another reason for Congress to start regulating their bribes.

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

        I think here going to try and make their own code of ethics first. That’s the impression I get from Kagan and Kavanaugh commenting. It should be interesting to see if the highest court in the land tries weasel words.

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

      The point of the federalist society isn’t to just smash and grab power overtly everywhere all at once. They know they can still get the legislative results they want with Alabama having a second black district.

      So they aren’t going to waste political capital on it.

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

        With the margins that in the House currently it could very well change who holds the House, and accordingly the legislative results.

  • flta@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is great news! For anyone reading, but especially those in Alabama, make sure to join one of your city/county’s Democratic club/caucus to help organize change at the local level and better influence the direction the Democratic Party takes locally and nationally!

    • RedditReject@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You obviously don’t know how messed up the Alabama Democratic party is. They have essentially torn themselves into two factions and provide no support for most of the Democrats that run for office.

      • flta@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dysfunctional state parties is a symptom of not enough people being involved and a reason for people to get involved.

        • RedditReject@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You would think. But folks in Alabama have been trying to get involved and half the party (the one recognized but the state) rejects them. Which is why Doug Jones and Chris England have been trying to get things working along party lines there. But the other faction ( a black church organization that has a death grip on the part) rejects any diversity and modernization.

          Reply All did a set of podcasts about the mess a few years ago called “The Real Enemy”. I’d suggest that if you want to understand the history. It’s a few years old now, but not much has changed except one of the main folks died and the power transferred to her cronies.

  • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    The expert appointed by the district court is Richard Allen, and he has already completed his work and submitted 3 maps for the 3 judge panel to choose from.

    • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is good news. I think most of what they were doing was to try and delay any changes until after another election.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


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

    Alabama’s Attorney General Steve Marshall, a Republican, argued that the new map kept communities of interest intact, unifying the so-called Black Belt of the state.

    Marshall argued the lower court had erred in requiring that a second majority-Black district be drawn.

    “The court gutted the State’s discretion to apply traditional redistricting principles in 2023, by expressly refusing to defer to them when they didn’t yield the ‘right’ racial results,” Marshall said.

    Challengers to the map, represented by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the ACLU and others, had urged the justices to reject the state’s bid arguing that the map in question dilutes the power of Black voters.

    They charged the state with “unabashedly” defying an opinion the justices issued just three months ago.


    The original article contains 532 words, the summary contains 167 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!