Alabama House and Senate both advance GOP congressional redistricting plans
On Wednesday, the Alabama House of Representatives passed a controversial congressional redistricting plan along party lines that failed to create a second majority-minority district. Hours later, the Alabama Senate passed a similar plan that also failed to turn Alabama’s Second Congressional District into a majority-minority district. Civil rights groups are demanding that the Alabama Legislature create a second majority-minority district after the three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals declared Alabama’s 2021 Congressional rezoning in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. After initially staying the decision, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed that the Legislature’s 2021 plan denied Black Alabamians (27% of the population the ability to choose their own congressional representation). The court has ordered the state to present a new redistricting map by July 21. The National Redistricting Foundation (NRF) accused the Legislature of defying the court order by not preparing a plan with two majority-minority districts. The NRF is the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC), Marina Jenkins is the Executive Director of the NRF. “The maps passed by the Alabama House and Senate are in flagrant disregard of the Alabama district court’s order to enact a map with two districts in which Black Alabamians can elect a candidate of their choice, and the Supreme Court’s decision affirming the lower court,” said Executive Director Jenkins in a statement. “This shameful process, riddled with partisan schemes deployed at the expense of Black voters’ rights, has failed the voters of Alabama who deserve a fair and compliant congressional map. Time and time again, Republican legislators have shown their intentions lie solely in maintaining their own political power and silencing the constituents they are meant to represent. Neither the House nor Senate map meet the requirement of the court’s order, or the law, and will be challenged.” The plaintiffs in Milligan v. Allen that challenged the 2021 redistricting presented two maps to the court showing either two 51% Black districts or two districts that were 48% Black. The NRF has endorsed a heavily gerrymandered (along racial lines) plan that results in a 52.2% Black Second Congressional District and a 56.7% Black Seventh Congressional District. The NRF-supported plan achieved that by dividing Mobile County into a majority-Black section that would be in the new majority-minority district that would stretch from the Mississippi to Georgia state lines and an overwhelmingly White portion that would then be in the First Congressional District with nearby Baldwin County (which is overwhelmingly White and Republican). It similarly divides Jefferson and Tuscaloosa Counties along racial lines. The Seventh Congressional District is already a majority-minority district represented since 2011 by Rep. Terri Sewell – a Black Democrat. That plan also puts Congressman Jerry Carl (R-AL01) and Congressman Barry Moore (R-AL02) into the same district – the First. The Republicans in the Alabama Legislature have rejected any plan that divides Mobile County or splits Baldwin and Mobile into separate congressional districts. They argue that the Alabama Gulf Coast and the Wiregrass regions should not be divided. The Republican Legislators call their plan the Communities of Interest Plan. The House passed a version of that plan that keeps Mobile and Baldwin whole and in the First Congressional District but increases the number of Black voters in the Second Congressional District to 42.5%. The Seventh Congressional District would be 52.15% Black. The Legislative Committee on Reapportionment is chaired by State Rep. Chris Pringle – a Mobile Republican – and State Sen. Steve Livingston – a North Alabama Republican. Pringle sponsored the plan that the House of Representatives passed, while Livingston sponsored the plan that the Senate passed. Pringle insisted that even though there are more Whites than Blacks in his plan’s Second Congressional District, it would be a toss-up district that either party could win. Black legislators insisted that the only way a Black person could win a congressional race in Alabama is if the district is majority Black. In the Senate plan, the Second Congressional District would become 38.8% Black, and the Seventh Congressional District would remain majority Black. If either of the Republican plans passes the Legislature on Friday as drawn today, the plaintiffs are almost certain to reject that plan and ask the three-judge panel in Atlanta to reject the Alabama GOP plan and appoint a special master to draw the districts. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Alabama Republicans reject call for 2nd majority Black district, despite Supreme Court ruling
Alabama Republicans, under orders of the U.S. Supreme Court to redraw congressional districts to give minority voters a greater voice in elections, rejected calls Monday to craft a second majority-Black district and proposed a map that could test what is required by the judge’s directive. Lawmakers must adopt a new map by Friday after the high court in June affirmed a three-judge panel’s ruling that Alabama’s existing congressional map — with a single Black district out of seven statewide — likely violated the Voting Rights Act. In a state where more than one in four residents is Black, the lower court panel had ruled in 2022 that Alabama should have another majority-Black congressional district or something “close to it” so Black voters have the opportunity to “elect a representative of their choice.” Republicans, who have been resistant to creating a certain Democratic district, proposed a map that would increase the percentage of Black voters in the 2nd congressional district from about 30% to nearly 42.5%, wagering that will satisfy the court’s directive. House Speaker Pro Tempore Chris Pringle, who serves as co-chairman of the state redistricting committee, said the proposal complies with the order to provide a district in which Black voters have the “opportunity to elect the representative of their choice.” “The goal here, for me, was to provide an opportunity for African-Americans to be elected to Congress in the second congressional district,” Pringle said. However, the National Redistricting Foundation, one of the groups that backed challenges to the Alabama map, called the proposal “shameful” and said it would be challenged. “It is clear that Alabama Republicans are not serious about doing their job and passing a compliant map, even in light of a landmark Supreme Court decision,” said Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation. She called that a pattern seen throughout the state’s history “where a predominately white and Republican legislature has never done the right thing on its own, but rather has had to be forced to do so by a court.” The Permanent Legislative Committee on Reapportionment approved the proposal in a 14-6 vote that fell along party lines. The proposal was introduced as legislation Monday afternoon as lawmakers convened a special session to adopt a new map by a Friday deadline set by the three-judge panel. House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter said he believes the new district will be a swing district that could elect either a Democratic candidate or a Republican. “I think that the models will show that it could go either way, probably. I think all the court’s asked for was a fair chance. I certainly think that map does it. I don’t think there’s any question about that,” Ledbetter said. Democrats accused Republicans of rushing the process and thwarting the court’s directive. Sen. Vivian Davis Figures, a Democrat from Mobile, said the court was clear that the state should create a second majority-Black district or something close to it. “Forty-two percent is not close to 50. In my opinion, 48, 49 is close to 50,” Figures said. She had urged colleagues to adopt a proposal by the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case that would make the 2nd district 50% Black. Rep. Chris England, a Democrat from Tuscaloosa, said he also doesn’t think the GOP proposal would satisfy the court’s directive. He said Republican lawmakers pushed through their proposal without a public hearing or producing a voter analysis of how the district will perform. Pringle said that information will be available Tuesday. “The map that we adopted, nobody had any input on. There was no public input on it, not subject to a public hearing, and now it’s going to be the map of choice,” England said. Deuel Ross, a lawyer with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund who argued the case before the Supreme Court, said lawmakers have yet to provide the information “necessary to evaluate whether these plans will, in fact, provide Black voters with opportunities to elect their candidates of choice in two districts.” “Any plan with a low Black voting age population does not appear to comply with the Court’s instruction,” Ross wrote in an email. Partisan politics underlies the looming redistricting fight. A higher percentage of Black voters increases the chances that the seat will switch from GOP to Democratic control. Pollster Zac McCrary said predicting a district’s partisan leanings depends on a number of metrics, but “getting a district too far below the mid-40s in terms of Black voter composition could certainly open the door for Republicans.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press
Supreme Court voting rights ruling stuns minority voters, who hope it expands their representation
This week’s Supreme Court decision ordering Alabama to redraw its congressional districts was seen by many minority lawmakers and voting rights activists as a stunning victory with the potential to become a major stepping stone for undoing political maps that dilute the strength of communities of color. Hank Sanders, a former Alabama state lawmaker who has long been politically active in the state, knew there would be a decision since the court heard arguments in the case last fall. He was not anticipating being happy with the outcome, given that previous rulings of the conservative-leaning court had essentially gutted some of its most important provisions. “I was afraid they were going to go ahead and wipe out section 2,” he said, referring to the part of the Voting Rights Act at stake in the Alabama case. He was at his law office Thursday in Selma, scene of one of the most pivotal moments in the Civil Rights Movement, when news of the 5-4 ruling in favor of Alabama’s Black voters was announced. “It was a surprise that was good for my day,” he said. How the decision will affect similar lawsuits against political maps drawn in other states is unclear, although voting rights groups say the ruling provides firm guidance for lower courts to follow. The court majority found that Alabama concentrated Black voters in one district, while spreading them out among the others to make it much more difficult to elect more than one candidate of their choice. Alabama’s Black population is large enough and geographically compact enough to create a second district, the judges found. Just one of its seven congressional districts is majority Black, in a state where more than one in four residents is Black. Similar maps have been drawn in other states, primarily by Republican-controlled legislatures. Kareem Crayton, the Brennan Center’s senior director for voting and representation, called the court’s decision “a welcome surprise” and said challenges to the maps in Louisiana and Georgia were the most similar to the Alabama case. While it was considering the Alabama case, the Supreme Court had placed a hold on a lower court ruling in Louisiana allowing creation of a second majority-Black district. That’s now likely to be lifted. A federal judge last year also ruled that some of Georgia’s U.S. House and state legislative districts likely violated the Voting Rights Act, but he had allowed the districts to be used in the 2022 elections because it was too close to the election to redraw them. Maps in all three states could have to be redrawn for the 2024 elections. Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, said in a statement that the court’s action reaffirmed his own belief that Louisiana’s map, which was drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature, violated the law. “As I said when I vetoed it, Louisiana’s current congressional map violates the Voting Rights Act,” he said. “Louisiana’s voting population is one-third Black. We know that in compliance with the principles of the Voting Rights Act, Louisiana can have a congressional map where two of our six districts are majority Black.” Rep. Troy Carter, a Black Democrat representing Louisiana’s lone district that is majority Black, said the Legislature should immediately convene to draw a second majority-minority district. “This Supreme Court ruling is a win not just for Alabamians but for Louisianans as well,” Carter said in an emailed statement. “Rarely do we get a second chance to get things right — now Louisiana can.” In Georgia, Bishop Reginald Jackson, a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits challenging the state’s congressional map, said he was ecstatic when he heard the news about the ruling and hopes it will boost their case. He said he became involved in the lawsuit amid concerns that the state’s Black population had increased while the number of Black congressional representatives had decreased with the last round of redistricting. “So how could you have less Black representation when you have more Blacks moving into the state than before?” said Jackson, who presides over 534 African Methodist Episcopal churches in Georgia with over 90,000 parishioners The Alabama case, along with pending lawsuits in Georgia and Louisiana, means Black voters will likely have an opportunity to elect candidates in three additional districts, said Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, one of the organizations that has spearheaded voting rights challenges in the states. She said litigation in Texas by other plaintiff groups could mean additional seats there where minority voters “have the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice that don’t exist now.” Texas state Rep. Victoria Neave Criado, a Democrat who chairs the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, said the case was a “major win for voting rights.” She said following recent decisions by the current court in other areas she considers fundamental, such as last year’s overturning of the constitutional right to abortion, she was concerned about the direction the justices would take with voting rights and was relieved to see Thursday’s outcome. “As we are seeing the Latino community rise in many ways, we want to ensure that Latino power is translated into Latino political power,” Neave Criado said. Latinos and whites share an equal proportion of the Texas population, about 40% each, according to 2022 Census figures. Nina Perales, vice-president of litigation with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said the ruling closes the door on Texas using arguments similar to those made by Alabama as the cases there go forward. Perales leads the litigation for a similar case out of Texas, which is based on the redistricting maps created in 2021. In addition to the Voting Rights Act challenge to Texas’ congressional districts, similar section 2 claims have been brought against numerous voting districts used for state legislatures and local governments around the country. Attorney Mark Gaber argued a case this week alleging Washington’s state legislative districts diluted the voting strength of Hispanic residents and will be arguing a similar case next week involving Native Americans and North Dakota’s state legislative districts. He thinks Thursday’s ruling will strengthen the case. In Alabama, the question
