Federal Court Weighs Alabama Map Fight Again

The fight over Alabama’s congressional districts returned to federal court in Birmingham this week as State attorneys and voting rights groups clashed over the future of the State’s election maps.

At issue is whether Alabama can move forward with a Republican-backed congressional map that federal courts previously ruled likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voting power. The hearing follows a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, which narrowed how race can be considered in redistricting cases.

The three-judge federal panel heard arguments Friday at the Hugo Black Courthouse in Birmingham. Attorneys for the State argued the Supreme Court’s new ruling changed the legal landscape enough to justify restoring the Legislature’s 2023 congressional map. That map would likely return Alabama to one majority-Black congressional district instead of the two districts used during the 2024 election cycle.

The court-drawn 2024 map created a second district where Black voters had an opportunity to elect their preferred candidate. That district helped elect Democratic Congressman Shomari Figures in 2024.

“There’s a clear discrepancy on what the plaintiffs and what the defendants feel is the outcome of the Callais decision and also the court’s order,” said Katherine Robertson, Chief Counsel for Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office. “We’re still arguing for the State’s authority in this matter.”

Robertson also said the State is ready to continue the legal fight if needed.

“We hope that the court will rule quickly. We will be prepared to appeal quickly if that’s necessary,” she said. “We want to make sure that Alabamians are able to have elections with the maps that they wanted in 2023.”

Attorneys representing the plaintiffs argued the Supreme Court did not erase earlier findings that Alabama’s 2023 map unlawfully weakened Black voting strength. They told the panel the Callais ruling does not undo the court’s earlier constitutional findings under the 14th Amendment.

State attorneys faced tough questions from members of the panel during Friday’s hearing. Judges appeared skeptical of Alabama’s effort to revive a map the same court had previously ruled unconstitutional.

One judge questioned whether switching maps again would create confusion for voters after the State already used the court-ordered districts in 2024 and during this year’s recent primary election.

The dispute stems from the long-running Allen v. Milligan case, which originally led federal courts to order Alabama to create a second district where Black voters could elect candidates of their choice. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court surprised many observers when it initially upheld key portions of the Voting Rights Act and sided against Alabama’s original congressional map.

That changed earlier this year after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais. In May, the Court vacated earlier lower court rulings in Alabama’s case and ordered the matter reconsidered under the new standard.

The Alabama Legislature and Governor Kay Ivey moved quickly after that decision. Lawmakers approved legislation allowing special congressional primaries later this summer if courts permit the State to return to the 2023 map.

Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton said opponents of the map are prepared to continue fighting in court and in public.

“We’re going to be involved. We’re going to be involved in whatever level that we need to be,” Singleton said. “If that’s filing more motions in court or just being out here in these streets and making sure we get people to the polls and getting people to vote.”

Time is a significant factor in this case, as the State’s Director of Elections testified that Counties will only have seven days, beginning on Wednesday, May 27, to assign voters into new districts under the 2023 map — assuming, of course, that the courts allow the State to proceed.

Special primaries have already been called on August 11 for districts 1,2, 6 and 7, using the new map. The May 19 primary election for these districts has already occurred under the old map, but these votes were not certified.

No ruling was issued Friday. The case will likely return to the U.S. Supreme Court regardless of how the Birmingham panel rules.