Maps of the Republican proposal to redraw Alabama’s congressional districts are on display at the Alabama State Capitol on Tuesday, July 18, 2023, in Montgomery, Alabama.
Kim Chandler | AP
Alabama asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to suspend a lower court’s order banning the use of controversial congressional district maps in the 2026 midterm elections.
The order prohibits the map, which was submitted in 2023, from being used in Alabama’s next legislative election, citing the risk of diluting the black vote.
The request to the state’s highest court came a day after a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court in Birmingham, Alabama, reiterated an earlier ruling that found the 2023 district map “unconstitutional and intentionally discriminates on the basis of race.”
“Once again, we cannot understand anything other than that the 2023 Plan is intentionally discriminatory,” the commission’s decision said. The panel’s two judges were appointed by President Donald Trump.
The commission had been directed by the Supreme Court to reconsider the question of whether the maps could be used in the November election in light of the high court’s recent decision in a case known as Louisiana v. Calais, which found that Louisiana’s own congressional mapping was racial gerrymandering.
The committee’s decision was a victory for Democrats. Since last year, Democrats have often been on the defensive against Republican efforts to redraw congressional districts across the country to maintain their House majority.
In an emergency petition to the Supreme Court asking for a stay of the commission’s order, Alabama said, “The stay is warranted to ensure that Alabama is not again prevented from taking advantage of the legislatively enacted 2023 Plan based on a decision that defies Curry, manipulates the Purcell Doctrine, and violates the Constitution’s promise of equal protection for all.”
The Purcell principle is the idea that courts should not change election rules close to the campaign date.
“Calais State justified Alabama’s position regarding the legality of the 2023 Plan, but in one week the district court ruled that Curry State would not change anything,” the state said in its filing.
“Worse still, the district court further reinforced its constitutional holding that Alabama intentionally discriminates by rejecting intentional discrimination, which has no place in our Constitution,” the state said. “The district court accused the state of denying ‘opportunity’ to minority voters and ‘diluting’ the vote, without ever acknowledging how Calais himself challenged the district court’s pre-Calais rulings on that score.”
Alabama asked the Supreme Court to rule on the request by next Monday, June 1.
