Federal judges select new congressional map for Alabama
By Steve Wilson | The Center Square A three-judge panel chose the new congressional map for Alabama in an order issued Thursday that creates a second Black majority district. The three U.S. judges – Stanley Marcus, Anna Manasco, and Terry Moorer – picked the third of three potential remedial plans drawn by a court-appointed special master and a cartographer. They also ordered Alabama to use the map to conduct its 2024 elections. “We conclude that Remedial Plan 3 completely remedies the likely Section Two violation we identified while best preserving the State’s legislative preferences, as expressed through the 2023 Plan, and otherwise complies with the requirements of the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965,” the order read. In the order, the judges said voting in Alabama is “extremely racially polarized,” acknowledging that the minority “opportunity” district will likely be a pickup for Democrats in 2024. The plan will carve a new 2nd District that will stretch the width of the state from from northern Mobile County to the Wiregrass region of southeastern Alabama. The remainder of Mobile and Baldwin counties will remain together in the 1st Congressional District. The judges said in their order that this district will have a Black voting age population of 48.7%, smaller than the 7th District (the state’s existing minority-majority district) with a Black population of 51.9%. Also, the judges said “splitting the Gulf Coast is necessary to remedy the vote dilution we identified.” In a previous order that compared the three plans, the court said the third plan “is the most compact of the three plans” and “has only six county splits.” They also said the third plan “retains the largest portion of the population of the city of Mobile (90.4%) and the city of Birmingham (93.3%) within a single district.” The state tried to keep maps drawn during July’s special session that kept the state with one majority Black district, but the three-judge panel (with two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump) rejected those claims last month. On June 8, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Allen v. Milligan that said Alabama’s previously-drawn map violated the Voting Rights Act and ordered new maps that create an “opportunity district” for minority voters to cast ballots for the candidates of their choice. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Federal appeals court rejects Alabama Congressional redistricting map
On Tuesday, a three-judge panel struck down the Alabama Legislature’s new congressional redistricting map. The Court is expected to appoint a special master to redraw Alabama’s congressional map because the state Legislature refused to draw a map compliant with the Court’s previous order to draw a map with two majority-minority districts. In June, the Court ordered the state to submit a map with two majority-minority districts or something close to that. Instead, Alabama Republicans simply drew a map increasing the percentage of Black voters in Republican Congressman Barry Moore’s Second Congressional District from 30% to 39.9%. “We are not aware of any other case in which a state legislature — faced with a federal court order declaring that its electoral plan unlawfully dilutes minority votes and requiring a plan that provides an additional opportunity district — responded with a plan that the state concedes does not provide that district,” the judges wrote in a 196-page ruling. The plaintiffs in the Milligan v Allen case that challenged the original 2021 redistricting as not compliant with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 rejected the second map. On Tuesday, the Court issued a ruling agreeing with the plaintiffs. None of this was unexpected. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall in August told the Alabama Republican Executive Committee meeting in Montgomery that he was skeptical of the three-judge panel ruling in favor of the state. The state lost a narrow 5 to 4 decision before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court in June affirmed that the three-judge panel in Atlanta was correct in its initial 2022 decision to halt Alabama’s election under the 2021 redistricting. After the initial judgment, the three-judge panel’s decision to block the 2022 election, the Supreme Court ruled that the three-judge panel likely had been right that the 2021 redistricting was not compliant with the Voting Rights Act. The special master has been given until September 25 to redraw Alabama’s Congressional districts, creating a second majority-minority district. The state is expected to ask the Supreme Court to stay the three-judge panel ruling and hear this case as they did last year. The state will likely ask the Supreme Court to again stay the three-judge panel’s ruling to allow the 2024 elections to take place under the partisan 2022 redistricting. The plaintiffs suing the state will undoubtedly challenge any legal maneuvering by the state of Alabama. State Senators close to the redistricting decision explained to Alabama Today that the state is staking its hope on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh switching sides and voting with the four conservative jurists: Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch. All of this is dependent on the Supreme Court even considering the case. They are not obligated by law to take up the matter. Kavanaugh voted with Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the decision for the majority. The three-judge panel is comprised of one Clinton appointee, Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus, and two Trump appointees, District Judge Anna Manasco and District Judge Terry Moorer. Candidate qualifying with the two major political parties begins in October, so the state needs to know what the district boundaries will look like by October 1. If this decision is applied to other southern states, including Texas and Florida, Democrats could pick up as many as twelve new majority-minority districts, likely flipping control of the U.S. House of Representatives to the Democrats in the 2024 elections. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Justices weigh Alabama’s bid to stop redistricting order
The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing Alabama’s request to freeze a court order requiring the state to draw new congressional lines and create a second district with a significant number of Black voters. Alabama has asked the court to halt an injunction issued by a three-judge panel blocking the use of the current map after the panel found it likely violates the Voting Rights Act. The Alabama attorney general argued the ruling will throw 2022 elections into chaos and require the state to put race above other redistricting criteria. But lawyers for people and organizations that brought the initial lawsuit dispute that and argue the current lines — similar to those in use since the 1990s — do not reflect a state that has grown more racially diverse. “This is very much a textbook case of a Voting Rights Act violation,” said NAACP Legal Defense Fund senior counsel Deuel Ross, whose organization represented the plaintiffs in the case. The three-judge panel last month found Alabama’s map, drawn by the GOP-dominated Alabama Legislature, likely violates the Voting Rights Act because, “Black voters have less opportunity than other Alabamians to elect candidates of their choice to Congress.” The decision cited Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act which prohibits racial discrimination in election procedures. Alabama’s congressional delegation has for years consisted of one Black representative elected from a heavily Black district and six white representatives elected from heavily white districts. The judges added that any “remedial plan will need to include two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” U.S. Census numbers show the state has grown racially more diverse since 1990. Black people make up about 27% of the state’s population while white people make up 63% of the population. “We think that Alabama has an obligation to draw fair maps that are reflective of the state’s very rich history of diversity, not just racial diversity, but diversity in terms of representation for everyone,” Ross said. The Alabama attorney general argues the ruling will improperly require states to prioritize race over other redistricting criteria. “The court-ordered redraw marks a radical change from decades of Alabama’s congressional plans. It will result in a map that can be drawn only by placing race first above race-neutral districting criteria, sorting and splitting voters across the State on the basis of race alone,” Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall wrote in the state’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Fourteen conservative-led states signed on to a brief in support of Alabama, arguing that the ruling and “absence of clarity no doubt means litigation will ensue across the country over new maps.” Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry filed a brief along with attorneys general from Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. Lawyers for plaintiffs argued Alabama is misrepresenting the ruling as prioritizing race instead of assessing whether an additional majority-Black district could be created consistent with compactness and traditional districting principles. It is unclear when the court will rule but Alabama faces a looming deadline to get new maps in place unless justices intervene. The three-judge panel pushed back the congressional candidate qualification deadline with political parties from Friday until February 11 to allow the Legislature the opportunity to enact a remedial plan. Alabama lawmakers appear to be waiting on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision. The legislative reapportionment committee has not met since the ruling of the three-judge panel, some members said. “The attorney general has filed motions of stay and of appeal with the Supreme Court and we’re just going to need to see what the outcomes are, Senate President Pro Tem Greg Reed said. The three judges that issued the unanimous ruling consisted of one judge appointed by former President Bill Clinton — Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus — and two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump — U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco and U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer. Evan Milligan, a Montgomery resident and the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said Alabama likely would have lost a congressional seat if not for the population growth of minority groups, including people born in other countries. “To produce maps that undercount the voting strength of the very population that’s contributing to the ability of the state to even have seven congressional districts is even more indefensible to me,” Milligan said. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Judges maintain order for Alabama to draw new districts
A three-judge panel on Thursday refused to stay its decision that effectively orders Alabama to draw new congressional districts before the 2022 elections and to create a second district of which Black voters are a sizeable portion of the population. The panel denied Alabama’s request to put a preliminary injunction on hold as the state appeals the decision. In a sometimes strongly worded ruling, the judges reiterated findings they believe show the current map likely violates the Voting Rights Act and that demographic shifts merit the creation of a second district — instead of this one — with a substantial number of minority voters. The judges wrote they are “aware that the preliminary injunction is consequential” but said it was necessary. “We discern no basis for a finding that this case is the extraordinary case in which we must allow an election to proceed under a map that we have determined — on the basis of a substantial evidentiary record — very likely violates the Voting Rights Act,” the judges wrote. A spokesman said the Alabama attorney general’s office did not have a comment on the ruling. Alabama is currently represented by one Black Democrat elected from the state’s only majority-Black district and white Republicans elected from heavily white districts. About 27% of the state’s population is Black. The three-judge panel said it was a “red herring” for the state to argue the current districts are lawful because they resemble long-used districts. “The argument also ignores the obvious reality that as maps age, demographic changes may eventually turn a lawful map into an unlawful map,” the judges wrote. Alabama’s Black population rose from 25.26% of the population in the 1990 census to 27.1% of the population in the 2020 census. At the same time, the white population dropped from 73.65% of the population in the 1990 census to 63.12% of the population in 2020. The three judges that issued the ruling consisted of one judge appointed by former President Bill Clinton — Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus and two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump — U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco and U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Alabama appeals ruling ordering new congressional districts
Alabama on Tuesday began appealing a federal court ruling that ordered the state to draw new congressional districts, including a second district with a substantial number of minority voters. The Alabama attorney general’s office filed a notice of appeal to the judges’ order that blocked the current map from being used in the upcoming 2022 elections. The state argued similar maps had been in use for decades with court approval, and the ruling is problematic with the closeness of May primaries. The state also asked the judges to stay their order during the appeals process. “And roughly two months before absentee voting begins, it is clear that the Court’s order will cause irreparable harm to Alabama, its aspiring congressional representatives, and the voters they seek to represent,” lawyers for the state wrote in the emergency motion. The state asked for a quick ruling, and a judge ordered attorneys for voters who filed the initial lawsuit to submit a response by Thursday night. A three-judge panel on Monday issued a preliminary injunction that blocked Alabama from using its current map that created one heavily Black district and six heavily white districts. “Black voters have less opportunity than other Alabamians to elect candidates of their choice to Congress,” judges wrote in the ruling. The judges wrote that any remedial plan will need to include two districts in which Black voters “either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” The ruling was a victory for Democrats who had argued the lines pack many Black voters into a single district and limits the ability of Black voters elsewhere to influence elections because they live in overwhelmingly white Republican districts. House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels said districts lines should reflect the racial and political diversity of the state. Alabama’s congressional delegation consists of one Black Democrat and six white Republicans. Black people make up about 27% of Alabama’s population. “Well, for me, a state that is approximately 40% Democrat with only one representative out of seven, I mean, that speaks for itself,” he said. Daniels suggested it would be best for the court to go ahead and draw the districts. “I suspect this will probably make it up to the Supreme Court at some point, but I think that this is going to set the tone for the nation and addressing redistricting long-term,” he said. The three judges that issued the ruling consisted of one judge appointed by former President Bill Clinton — Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus and two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump — U.S. District Judges Anna Manasco and U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer. The Alabama House speaker told reporters Tuesday that legislative leaders are discussing how to proceed. “Well, we’re meeting with legal, and we’re finding out what our options are, and at this point, we don’t know we just got to wait and see,” Republican House Speaker Mac McCutcheon of Monrovia told reporters. McCutcheon said the “reapportionment committee is ready to go to work” if needed. The state faces a tight timeline. Party primaries are in May. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Steve Flowers: We now have a very youthful federal judiciary in Alabama
Our senior senator, Richard Shelby, has left an indelible legacy and imprint on our state. Every corner of the state has been the recipient of his prowess at bringing home the bacon to the Heart of Dixie. Every university has enjoyed a largesse of federal dollars. He has made the Huntsville Redstone Arsenal one of the most renowned high technology regions in the nation, not to mention placing the FBI’s second home in Huntsville. Shelby’s accomplishments for Alabama would take a book to enumerate. However, what is not universally known is that Senator Richard Shelby has transformed the federal judiciary in Alabama for years to come. During the entire eight-year presidency of Barack Obama, by nature, we had some attrition in our federal judiciary in all three regions, Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts. Even though President Obama sought to appoint Democratic judges throughout the state, Senator Shelby and Senator Jeff Sessions thwarted all Democratic appointees and held these cherished and powerful judgeships vacant. Shelby and Sessions were hopeful that one day there would be a Republican president coupled with a Republican Senate majority, and they would be able to appoint Republican jurists to the federal bench in Alabama. That happened when Donald Trump became president. Senator Sessions had parted with his senate seat to become attorney general, so that left Senator Shelby to select and get confirmed a host of new, young federal judges in Alabama. Shelby assigned his loyal and brilliant Chief of Staff, Katie Boyd Britt, the job of vetting potential federal judgeships. She and Shelby chose an outstanding cadre of young, well-educated, extremely qualified, moderately conservative men and women to sit on the federal bench in Alabama. This group is stellar and will be the majority of federal judges for the next 25 to 30 years. This coup of appointing young, conservative, extremely capable judges to the federal bench in Alabama may be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s greatest legacies. Shelby had Andrew Brasher first appointed to the Middle District of Alabama. However, soon thereafter, an opening occurred on the Eleventh Circuit, and so Shelby had President Trump appoint Brasher to the higher appeals court. Prior to Brasher’s appointment to the Middle District, he practiced law with Bradley Arant in Birmingham. He was solicitor general and a law clerk for Judge Bill Pryor. Judge Brasher is a graduate of Samford University and Harvard Law School. Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Anna Manasco as a federal judge in the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Manasco, like Judge Brasher, practiced law in Birmingham with Bradley Arant prior to her federal appointment. She graduated with honors from Emory University before earning her law degree from Yale Law School. Shelby aligned with President Trump to appoint Corey Maze for a seat on the federal bench in the Northern District. Judge Maze was a prosecutor for the State of Alabama Attorney General’s office. He is a summa cum laude graduate of Auburn University and a graduate of Georgetown Law. Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Liles Burke to a federal judgeship in the Northern District. Burke was an Associate Judge of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals before his federal appointment. He obtained his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Alabama. Annemarie Axon is another Trump and Shelby anointed appointee for the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Axon practiced law in Birmingham before her appointment. She, like all of the other Northern District appointees, is extremely well qualified. Axon also obtained her undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Alabama. Austin Huffaker, Jr. of Montgomery, was chosen by Shelby and Trump for a federal judgeship in the Middle District. He practiced law in Montgomery prior to his appointment. He has an engineering degree from Vanderbilt and earned his law degree from the University of Alabama School of Law. Also appointed by Shelby and Trump to the Middle District is Emily Marks of Montgomery. Judge Marks practiced law in Montgomery prior to her appointment. She is a graduate of Spring Hill College in Mobile and the University of Alabama School of Law. Jeffrey Beaverstock was appointed to a federal judgeship in the Southern District. He practiced law in Mobile and is a graduate of the Citadel and the University of Alabama School of Law. Terry Moorer was appointed by President Trump and confirmed by the senate for the Southern District. He was previously an assistant U.S. Attorney and is a graduate of Huntington College and the University of Alabama School of Law. This host of federal jurists in Alabama will be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s lasting legacies. See you next week. Steve Flowers is Alabama’s leading political columnist. His weekly column appears in over 60 Alabama newspapers. He served 16 years in the state legislature. Steve may be reached at www.steveflowers.us.
Alabama’s Terry Moorer becomes first black judicial nominee confirmed under Trump
The U.S. Senate has confirmed another one of of President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees from Alabama. Judge Terry F. Moorer of Greenville, Ala., earned confirmation in a unanimous voice vote in the Senate on Tuesday afternoon to be a U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Alabama. He will become the first African American judge to serve in that post. He is also the first black judicial nominee to earn confirmation during the Trump administration. Sworn in as Magistrate Judge in 2007, Moorer is a retired Col. in the Alabama National Guard, and was the primary architect of the Alabama Code of Military Justice. He has a J.D. degree from The University of Alabama Law School, a B.A. degree from Huntingdon College, as well as A.A. degree from Marion Military Institute. Prior to his appointment as Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Alabama from 1990-2007. From 2001-2007, he served as the Lead Task Force Attorney for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, where he was responsible for coordinating the investigation of and prosecution of major narcotics trafficking. “Judge Terry Moorer is well-suited to be a U.S. district judge in Alabama’s southern district,” said Alabama U.S. Senator Richard Shelby. “His decade of experience serving as a magistrate judge, along with his devotion to upholding the constitution make him fit to serve in this prestigious role. I congratulate Judge Moorer and am confident that our nation will continue to benefit from his dedication and service.” In November 2017, Moorer appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for the consideration of his nomination. During the hearing, Judge Moorer expressed that “a judge must be courteous and respectful to parties and attorneys” and “patient, open-minded, tactful, and fair to all parties.” Moorer continued by relaying that a “judge should listen carefully to the legal arguments, research the law, and then rule promptly based on the facts and the law.” He concluded by explaining that a “judge must decide matters based on the facts and law,” and while “a judge is still a person and cannot be expected to fully divorce themselves from all life experiences, their life experiences should play no role in the decision-making process.”
Donald Trump eyes two conservative Alabama judges to fill federal court vacancies
President Donald Trump once again is showing favor to the Yellowhammer State. On Monday, the president is expected to name two, conservative Alabama judges among a slate of 10 nominees to fill federal courts vacancies, as he takes the first major step toward filling more than 120 vacancies in lower federal courts across the country. According to a White House official, Trump will be nominating the judges from his previous list of potential Supreme Court justices. Among the nominees is Birmingham’s own Kevin C. Newsom, a lawyer in the Magic City, who served as the state’s solicitor general and clerked for Justice David H. Souter. The New York Times reports he will be nominated to the 11th Circuit in Atlanta. Newsom, a partner at the Birmingham-based Bradley firm, has argued four cases in the U.S. Supreme Court, filed amicus curiae briefs in many others, and authored numerous certiorari-stage briefs. He has also argued more than 35 cases in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Tenth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits, as well as in state supreme and appellate courts and a Native American tribal appellate court. The other Alabama nominee is judge Terry F. Moorer of the Federal District Court in Montgomery. Sworn in as Magistrate Judge in 2007, Moorer is expected to be the nominee for the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. A retired Col. in the Alabama National Guard, Moorer was the primary architect of the Alabama Code of Military Justice. He has a J.D. degree from The University of Alabama Law School, a B.A. degree from Huntingdon College, as well as A.A. degree from Marion Military Institute. Prior to his appointment as Magistrate Judge, he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Alabama from 1990-2007. From 2001-2007, he served as the Lead Task Force Attorney for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, where he was responsible for coordinating the investigation of and prosecution of major narcotics trafficking. Other nominees include: Federal Appeals Court Amy Coney Barrett: law professor at University of Notre Dame and former law clerk to Justice Scalia; 7th Circuit Court of Appeals John Bush: lawyer in Louisville, KY; 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Joan Larsen: Michigan Supreme Court Justice; 6th Circuit Court of Appeals David Stras: Minnesota Supreme Court Justice; 8th Circuit Court of Appeals Federal District Courts Dabney Friedrich: former member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission; U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge David Nye: Idaho state court judge; U.S. District Court of Idaho Scott Palk, assistant dean at University of Oklahoma College of Law; U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma Court of Federal Claims Damien Schiff: lawyer with Pacific Legal Foundation; Court of Federal Claims Before taking office, Trump’s nominees will need to confirmed by the U.S. Senate where Republicans will need only 51 votes to fill each judicial vacancy thanks to the 2013 decision by Senate Democrats to eliminate the filibuster for all presidential nominations below the Supreme Court. Monday’s announcement is expected to be the first of many to come.
