WASHINGTON — On Tuesday, a federal court halted the implementation of a new congressional map in Alabama designed by Republicans, which aimed to give them a significant electoral advantage.
Republican officials are likely to contest this decision by taking the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The three-judge panel concluded that despite a recent Supreme Court ruling related to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, their assessment remained firm: the map unlawfully discriminates against Black voters.
“We are confronted with a crucial decision on a very tight deadline,” the judges stated. “We have two options: allow the Secretary of State to oversee Alabama’s 2026 elections using a districting plan that we determined (after a comprehensive trial) was intentionally discriminatory, or issue a preliminary injunction.”
“Ultimately, we cannot justify forcing Alabamians to participate in the 2026 elections under a districting plan marred by intentional racial discrimination,” they added.
The panel from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama included one judge appointed by President Clinton and two appointed by President Trump.
The decision requires Alabama to use a court-ordered congressional map with one majority-black district and one “black opportunity district.”
That panel noted the special master appointed to redraw Alabama’s map did so without displaying “racial demographic data.” It juxtaposed that with the Louisiana case, where a second black majority district was ordered drawn.
The Supreme Court slapped down that Louisiana map last month, concluding it was a racial gerrymander. The high court released an updated framework for determining violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which bans practices aimed at suppressing voters on the basis of race.
Republican-appointed Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion that race-based redistricting can be used as a remedy to address a racist district, but only after the latter is definitively proven to be the case. He stressed that redistricting for partisan purposes alone can’t be struck down as a violation.
Since that decision, there has been a tidal wave of red states, particularly in the South, hoping to retool their congressional maps.
Back in 2023, the Supreme Court had found the GOP’s Alabama map with one black majority district likely flouted the Voting Rights Act.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court vacated a lower court ruling to stick with the court-ordered map so that litigation could play our about whether that order complied with its new precedent.
The three-judge panel stressed that it “carefully” evaluated the Supreme Court’s updated Voting Rights Act guidance in the Louisiana case.
“We emphasize that because of the exceptional public importance of this matter, we carefully reviewed the extensive evidentiary record in these cases with fresh eyes in light of [Louisiana v.] Callais,” the panel wrote.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall (R) promptly announced plans to appeal the panel’s ruling to the Supreme Court.
“This is a very fluid situation, and I will do my best to keep the people of Alabama apprised of our efforts. Know this—in my mind, it is not a matter of whether we win this case, only when,” he claimed in a statement.
While voters already participated in the May 11 primaries, Gov. Kay Ivey (R) scheduled special ones for the four congressional districts impacted by the redistricting fight for Aug. 11.
