Alabama is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow it to use a congressional map that has been blocked by federal courts, as the state resists implementing district lines that would create two largely Black districts and provide greater representation for the state's African American voters.
Republican Gov. Kay Ivey signed legislation Friday that would require the governor to call special primary elections for affected U.S. House districts if the Supreme Court allows the state to use district lines the legislature approved in 2023 but has been blocked from using. Ivey also signed similar legislation involving state Senate districts approved in 2021.
In a statement, Ivey said, "With this special session successfully behind us, Alabama now stands ready to quickly act, should the courts issue favorable rulings in our ongoing redistricting cases," and added, "I thank the Legislature for answering my call to address the issue in fast order. I am grateful to Speaker Ledbetter and Pro Tem Gudger for their strong leadership and focus this week. Alabama knows our state, our people and our districts best."
Federal Court Blocks Emergency Request
A federal court on Friday denied an emergency motion for a stay in the congressional redistricting case, saying, "Quite simply, we do not have the authority to issue an order that upends Alabama's status quo, especially in the middle of an election, while our injunction establishing that status quo is well under review in the nation's highest court."
The case comes as the Supreme Court has already halted an order for Alabama to use a U.S. House map with two largely Black districts. The state's redistricting fight is part of a broader dispute over congressional boundaries and the role of the Supreme Court in determining them.
State Officials Defend Map
State Attorney General Steve Marshall said Friday, "I will continue to fight for Alabama to be able to use the congressional map the people's elected representatives enacted." He also said, "Alabama drew a map based on lawful policy goals, not race, and the Supreme Court's recent ruling vindicates that approach. We were punished for doing the right thing, and we are asking the Court to correct that now."
The state is pressing the justices to allow it to use the 2023 congressional map approved by its legislature, now in its third year since approval. The legislation Ivey signed Friday, 3 days ago, positions Alabama to move quickly if the Supreme Court rules in its favor, potentially upending current district boundaries that were designed to ensure fair representation for Black voters.
Broader Implications for Voting Rights
The dispute centers on whether Alabama's congressional districts adequately represent the state's Black population. Federal courts had previously ordered the state to create a second district where Black voters would have a meaningful opportunity to elect their preferred candidates, but Alabama has resisted implementing such changes. The Supreme Court's involvement in blocking that order has raised concerns among voting rights advocates about the enforcement of fair representation standards.
The state Senate districts approved in 2021, now in their fifth year since approval, are also subject to similar legal challenges over representation and fairness.
Why This Matters:
This case directly affects the voting power and political representation of Alabama's Black residents, who make up a significant portion of the state's population but have historically faced barriers to equal representation in congressional districts. The outcome will determine whether federal courts can enforce voting rights protections that ensure minority communities have fair opportunities to elect representatives of their choice. Alabama's resistance to creating a second majority-Black district reflects ongoing tensions over the Voting Rights Act and the extent to which states can draw district lines that dilute minority voting strength. The Supreme Court's decision could set a precedent affecting redistricting battles nationwide, potentially weakening federal oversight of state redistricting processes and allowing states greater latitude to draw maps that reduce minority representation, even when courts have found violations of voting rights laws.