Supreme Court orders voting maps redrawn in Alabama to accommodate Black voters

[DemocratSinceBirth]

The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered Alabama officials to redraw the state’s congressional map to allow an additional Black majority district to account for the fact that the state is 27% Black.

The decision – that affords additional opportunities for minority voters to elect the candidate of their choice – comes as a surprise given the conservative majority on the court.

Supporters of voting rights had feared that the court was going to make it harder for minorities to challenge maps under Section 2 of the historic Voting Rights Act.

Chief Justice John Roberts penned the opinion for a 5-4 majority, siding with the court’s three liberals. Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the key parts of the holding, providing the fifth vote.

“We are content to reject Alabama’s invitation to change existing law,” Roberts said.

The fact that Roberts penned the decision is a surprise given that 10 years ago, the chief justice effectively gutted a separate section of the Voting Rights Act that required states with a history of discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing election laws.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/08/politics/supreme-court-alabama-voting-rights-milligan/index.html

[cilla4progress]

1. New

precedent?!

[Celerity]

2. As always, fuck that corrupt, bought, token Tom, aka Clarence 'Uncle Ruckus' Thomas.

[Norbert]

3. Just check those maps thoroughly

In Ohio, the GOP had a habit of submitting just about the same district map over and over again.

[Fullduplexxx]

4. They ordered the ohio maps be redrawn we're still waiting

[Nittersing]

5. to accommodate Black voters?

How 'bout, "to insure election integrity?"

[mahina]

8. ⬆️

[BlueCheeseAgain]

12. To me, election integrity means making sure that the voting/counting process is secure and correct.

This is about redistricting.

[NowISeetheLight]

6. North Carolina?

Can they appeal that horrible gerrymandering decision by the North Carolina Supreme Court using this as a precedent????

[BlueCheeseAgain]

13. This is about racial gerrymanders, not partisan ones.

So unfortunately, I don't that this case applies to that one. But it does apply to other cases of alleged racial gerrymandering in other southern states.

[NowISeetheLight]

14. I Wonder

Still I wonder if maybe reinvestigating the NC district lines based on race is warranted?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

7. Statement from @EliasLawGroup Partner @Abha_Khanna_ on today's Supreme Court decision.

I followed the oral arguments in this case and I thought that after the SCOTUS shadow docket rulings on this case and two other cases, that the SCOTUS was going to rule against the plaintiffs. I am happy to be wrong on this case. Evidently the oral arguments in this case made a difference.

Marc Elias is very happy with the results on this case.

Link to tweet

https://www.elias.law/newsroom/press-releases/elias-law-group-statement-on-victory-for-alabama-voters-voting-rights-advocates

Elias Law Group Statement on Victory for Alabama Voters, Voting Rights Advocates
Today, Elias Law Group Partner Abha Khanna, who argued Allen v. Milligan on behalf of the Caster respondents before the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2022, released the following statement after the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court decision in a victory for voting rights advocates.

“The Supreme Court made the right decision today, affirming the district court’s ruling in accordance with decades of established precedent. Alabama’s current congressional map systematically dilutes the voting power of Black Alabamians, in clear violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Thankfully, the Court today identified Alabama’s redistricting scheme as a textbook violation of the landmark civil rights law. I want to thank the National Redistricting Foundation for their support, the Legal Defense Fund for their partnership, and most importantly the Black Alabamians like Marcus Caster who stood up to demand what so many of us take for granted: an equal opportunity to access the political process.”
###

Link to tweet

[mahina]

9. Great news. When?

[Deminpenn]

10. Similar to the way SCOTUS reacted after FDR's court packing

plan. In that case, the rulings to declare many of FDR's New Deal programs unconstitutional stopped.
SCOTUS got the message that they were out of step with the times.

This time overturning Roe has blown up in their faces. Add to that the ethics problems surrounding Thomas. Roberts and Kavanaugh have at least shown they understand the political predicament SCOTUS is in with regard to faith in SCOTUS as an institution.

[Volaris]

11. Agreed; this is their 'oops, our bad...' moment.

Can't really prove it, but at least we know, that they know, that we know (you get it).