“Supreme Court strikes down Alabama’s voting map that favored white voters”

U.S. Supreme Court Key 2023 Decisions: A Surprise Voting Rights Ruling, Ruling Against Andy Warhol, Curtailing the E.P.A.’s Power, and a Victory for Tech Giants

The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the Alabama congressional voting map was a surprise to many who had feared the further erosion of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In Allen v. Milligan, No. 21-1086, the court ruled that Alabama had diluted the power of Black voters in drawing a congressional voting map, requiring the Legislature to draw a second district in which Black voters have the opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. This decision reaffirmed a landmark civil rights law and upheld the legitimacy of race-conscious decision-making by the government in redistricting.

A Victory for Voting Rights and Civil Rights Law

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who has often voted to restrict voting rights and is generally skeptical of race-conscious decision making by the government, wrote the majority opinion in the 5-to-4 ruling, stunning election-law experts. In agreeing that race may play a role in redistricting, the chief justice was joined by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and the court’s three liberal members, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The impact of the decision will not be limited to Alabama. Other states in the South, notably Louisiana and Georgia, may also have to redraw their maps to bolster Black voting power, which could, among other things, help Democrats in their efforts to retake the House. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland welcomed the ruling, stating that “Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race.”

Philosophical and Legal Implications

The decision in Allen v. Milligan must be understood against the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions on abortion and guns and a coming one that is likely to limit affirmative action in higher education. Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, noted that “It would have been an earthquake for the court to have read Section 2 as the dissenters would have, severely curtailing minority voters’ representation in Congress, state houses and city halls.” Hasen added that “Roberts and Kavanaugh’s joining with the liberals in preserving the status quo helps not only minority voters, but the court’s fragile legitimacy in the face of these other rulings and ethics scandals.”

The philosophical and legal implications of this decision are clear: the court affirmed the importance of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the legitimacy of race-conscious decision-making by the government in redistricting. This decision, while important, represents only a small victory for voting rights advocates who are fighting against a pitched battle over redistricting that is playing out across the country and often disadvantages growing minority communities.

Editorial and Advice

This decision represents an opportunity for the U.S. Supreme Court to reaffirm the importance of voting rights and civil rights legislation that is essential to the functioning of our democracy. Voting maps drawn by state legislatures can have a significant impact on the voices and representation of marginalized communities. The court’s affirmation of the importance of race-conscious decision-making in redistricting is a significant victory for civil rights law and for marginalized communities across the country.

As we continue to face challenges to voting rights and civil rights laws, it is essential that we remain vigilant and work to protect these sacred institutions. The struggle for voting rights is ongoing and requires a commitment to justice and equality for all Americans. It is our duty as citizens to ensure that the voices of all Americans, particularly those of marginalized communities, are heard and represented in our government.

Voting Rights-votingmap,SupremeCourt,Alabama,whitevoters,legaldecision