WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Thursday unexpectedly ruled against Alabama in a challenge to its recently redrawn congressional districts, affirming a lower court decision that ruled the map likely denied Black voters in that state an additional member in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The 5-4 decision by Chief Justice John Roberts was a win for voting rights advocates and a break with past decisions from the conservative court that have limited the scope of the Voting Rights Act. The decision means states will have to remain mindful of the impact on race when drawing political boundaries.
Roberts’ opinion, joined by the court’s liberal wing and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, framed Alabama’s argument that race shouldn’t come into play in the decision-making as inconsistent with the court’s precedents.
“The contention that mapmakers must be entirely ‘blind’ to race has no footing in our’ earlier decisions, Roberts wrote. “The line that we have drawn is between consciousness and predominance.”
At issue are the congressional boundaries Alabama lawmakers drew following the 2020 census that include one district out of seven with a majority of Black voters. African Americans account for more than a quarter of the state’s overall population.
The case was the latest to test the scope of the Voting Rights Act, the 1965 law intended to ensure African Americans are not discriminated against at the ballot box. The Supreme Court has weakened the reach of that law in a series of recent decisions at a time when voting itself has become an increasingly partisan issue.
Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent joined by three other conservatives, said the court’s decision laid bare the gulf between a “color-blind” Constitution and what he has described as the “consciously segregated districting system” in place today.
The question, Thomas wrote, is whether the Voting Rights Act “requires the State of Alabama to intentionally redraw its longstanding congressional districts so that Black voters can control a number of seats roughly proportional to the black share of the state’s population.”
The law, Thomas said, “demands no such thing, and, if it did, the Constitution would not permit it.”
Alabama told the high court that the once-in-a-decade changes to its previous districts were race-neutral and asserted that federal law shouldn’t compel states to draw additional minority districts just because such districts were possible to draw. But the voters challenging Alabama’s map said the state’s interpretation of the Voting Rights Act would significantly undermine its purpose.
During oral arguments in October, both the conservative and liberal justices seemed to wrestle with the implications of the state’s sweeping argument. Led by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, the court’s conservative wing seemed to be searching for a more narrow outcome that would still be a win for Alabama.
The case is Merrill v. Milligan.
In some states the redistricting process is governed by a non-partisan body, but the endeavor is more often a political one – led by state lawmakers who seek an advantage for their party. The Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that federal courts would not get involved in disputes about partisan gerrymandering.
But racial gerrymandering is another matter, in part because of the Voting Rights Act.
A 1986 Supreme Court decision, Thornburg v. Gingles, sets forth how federal courts are supposed to determine when a congressional map violates the Voting Rights Act. Courts must first consider factors such as whether there is a majority group large enough and compact enough to make up a district. Plaintiffs also must demonstrate that white residents vote together cohesively enough to defeat a minority group’s candidate.
Applying that standard, a three-judge federal court ruled against Alabama last year, concluding that the congressional map likely violated the Voting Rights Act. The court said it didn’t regard the question of whether the maps violated the law “as a close one.” Two of the three judges were nominated by a Republican president.
Responding to an emergency appeal last year, a divided Supreme Court allowed Alabama to use the map in the 2022 midterm elections while the litigation continued. Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that the ruling maintained the status quo ahead of what was then the state’s upcoming primary elections.
Alabama has only one Black member of Congress: Rep. Terri Sewell, a Democrat.
