In an emergency ruling on Tuesday night, the court’s conservative majority gave a first glimpse into congressional district battles under a weakened Voting Rights Act.
In February 2025, three federal judges in Alabama presided over an 11-day trial that included more than 20 witnesses, 40 lawyers and nearly 800 exhibits about the state’s proposed congressional district map.
At the end, the judges, including two appointed by President Trump, concluded that the Republican-led state legislature in Alabama had intentionally discriminated against Black voters, finding that their plan to include only one majority-Black district out of seven in a state where more than a quarter of residents are Black was “an intentional effort to dilute Black Alabamians’ voting strength.”
On Tuesday, in a late-night ruling, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority allowed Alabama to use the map anyway.
Citing “our colorblind Constitution,” the court’s conservative majority allowed the state to swap out its current map for one that eliminates a majority-Black district, likely giving an advantage to Republicans in their midterm race to hold onto a razor-thin House majority.
The decision to allow a map that had been struck down as “tainted by intentional race-based discrimination” by a lower court raised questions about when, if ever, the Supreme Court would invalidate a congressional map as racially discriminatory — and what role, if any, the justices believe federal courts should play in redistricting.
“The court just seems really hellbent on getting lower federal courts out of any policing of redistricting,” said Nicholas Stephanopoulos, a law professor at Harvard and an election law expert.