The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Alabama to use a new congressional map in this year’s midterm elections.
The decision is expected to strengthen Republican prospects and reduce the number of districts that black Democrats will represent in the state’s congressional delegation.
The ruling came in an unsigned order issued over the objections of the Court’s three liberal justices.
The decision arrived even though Alabama had already conducted its congressional primary elections, setting the stage for a significant reshaping of the state’s representation in Washington.
If the map remains in place through November, Alabama is expected to send six Republicans and one Democrat to the U.S. House next year.
The case is the latest development in a series of redistricting battles taking place across the country as both parties compete for advantage ahead of the midterm elections.
The Supreme Court has increasingly found itself at the center of those disputes, weighing challenges involving congressional maps in states including Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, and California.
With control of the House expected to be decided by a relatively small number of seats, redistricting fights have taken on outsized importance.
The Court’s intervention in multiple states has already had a substantial impact on the political landscape heading into November, with several of its recent rulings reshaping districts that could prove critical in determining which party controls Congress after the election, the outlet’s report continued.
The unsigned Tuesday night order relied in part on a legal doctrine known as the Purcell principle.
That says federal courts should not intervene in election disputes to change voting on the eve of elections, CNN noted.
In the Alabama case, the court said in its order, “the District Court interposed itself into Alabama’s ongoing efforts to conduct its imminent 2026 congressional elections under maps that its elected representatives selected.”
“Its view that conducting the elections under court-imposed maps would be more convenient for the state was not a valid justification for that intervention,” the majority wrote.
“While federal courts should not impose changes close to an election, states are free to decide for themselves whether last-minute changes to an election are in their best interests,” the order stated.
The court’s liberals complained that the majority’s decision was racist in nature, when in fact, the court’s majority ruled last month that congressional districts drawn up primarily to benefit one race are unconstitutional.
“Now the court is squarely faced with a record of the turmoil it has caused and the harm it has wrought,” Sotomayor wrote.
“Yet just as Alabama doubled down on racial discrimination, the court today doubles down on chaos,” she complained.
In fact, no one in Alabama is being denied the right to vote or “participate equally in democracy.” The same is true in every other state redrawing out their minority-majority congressional districts.
“The Alabama case is the latest emergency order tied to the court’s April 29 decision on the Voting Rights Act, in which a 6-3 majority gutted the ability of groups to bring claims of racial discrimination under that 1965 landmark law,” CNN reported.
“The decision essentially requires voting rights groups to find a ‘strong inference’ of intentional racial discrimination before proceeding with a lawsuit,” said the outlet.
Despite having its primary election in May, Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey signed legislation permitting special elections in August for the affected congressional districts, contingent upon court approval of the state’s new map.
Democratic Representatives Shomari Figures from the 2nd District and Terri Sewell from the 7th District are the only two Black members of Alabama’s seven-seat congressional delegation.
With the new district map, Republicans have the potential to reclaim Figures’ district; however, it remains uncertain how the electoral process will unfold ahead of the midterm elections, CNN said.
