Tuesday, October 4, 2022

Latest Voting Rights Act Threat

 



(President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund Janai Nelson, center, speaks to members of the press after the oral argument of the Merrill v. Milligan case at the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 4, 2022, in Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court heard oral argument of the case that challenge whether the new congressional map of Alabama violates the Voting Rights Act. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

On Tuesday October 4, 2022 Supreme Court Justices heard oral arguments for a case that challenges an Alabama voting redistricting map which could possibly eliminate the safeguards of the Voting Rights Act. The case, Merrill v. Milligan, examines whether Alabama’s 2021 redistricting map violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because it weakens the voting power of African Americans in Alabama. 


Black Voters make up roughly 27% of the Alabama population, but only one congressional district - which is about 14% of the state's population -  would be majority black in the plan drawn up by Alabama’s republican led legislature. Those in opposition to the map, claim the map should be redrawn to have an additional majority black district. Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour argued the map was drawn “in a lawful race-neutral manner”, and that the Black voters suing the state failed to meet the Gingles test as laid out in the 1986 decision in Thornburg v. Gingles. 


The Gingles Test would show if the map is an illegal racial gerrymander. The first step of the test would be for the African Americans to provide a sample map demonstrating that their proposition is attainable. Voters rights plaintiffs then must prove that Alabama's white voters tend to vote in a manner which usually defeats the minority’s preferred candidate. As studied in class, African Americans tend to lean to the left whereas white individuals in the South specifically tend to strongly lean to the right. With this understanding, it would be appropriate to conclude that African Americans in Alabama have little voting power in relation to their white counterparts. Gingles then requires judges to consider if the state has a history of discrimmination. It cannot go unnoted that historically racial segregation and Jim Crow laws were most prevalent in deep south states such as Alabama. Alabama was also the setting for major civil rights events such as the Montgomery bus boycott and violence toward the Freedom Riders which drew the nation's attention to the racial hatred in Alabama. While the state is asking the court to change a law which has “governed redistricting for nearly 40 years” an opinion on the case is expected sometime next year. 


Sources: 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio/2022 

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/10/4/23387283/supreme-court-merrill-milligan-alabama-racial-gerrymandering-voting-rights-act 

https://idahocapitalsun.com/2022/10/04/alabama-case-that-could-limit-voting-rights-act-heard-at-u-s-supreme-court/ 


1 comment:

Logan W said...

This seems like blatant gerrymandering. 27% of the population is African American but they would only have 14% of the electoral power?? How does that make sense? The Gingles test also seems like a bureaucratic tool to hamper political action against gerrymandering. It feels like the Gingles test includes a ton of unnecessary work and evidence in order to prove biased redistricting, when the fact that African Americans would be hugely unrepresented in the redistricting plan is enough evidence in the first place. Southern states have time and time again utilized gerrymandering to undermine the voting power of liberals and minorities, and it is no surprise to me that they continue to do so.