In a challenging year for lawyers defending Republican-drawn redistricting maps, unexpected developments have unfolded in the courts. Earlier this year, it was widely anticipated that the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn two lower court victories secured by Democrats and their progressive allies in early 2022. However, events took a surprising turn.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Allen v. Milligan, upheld a lower court’s decision to invalidate Alabama’s new congressional map for not complying with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The lower court had ruled that Alabama should have created two minority opportunity districts instead of one. This decision reaffirmed a crucial aspect of the VRA, catching many off guard.
Subsequently, the Court rejected the fringe “independent state legislature theory” in a North Carolina redistricting case. Once again, the Court’s majority declined to create a new legal doctrine, in contrast to the wishes of right-wing advocates.
In normal circumstances, the Supreme Court’s two high-profile losses for the GOP would have likely settled much of the ongoing lower court disputes related to redistricting. However, the current political climate is far from normal.
Alabama’s Republican-controlled Legislature chose to defy the Supreme Court’s decision and federal court orders requiring them to create a new map with two minority opportunity districts. The three-judge panel tasked with implementing the Supreme Court’s decision criticized Alabama for failing to take any steps to comply.
Similar scenarios are playing out in Louisiana and Georgia, where Republican-controlled legislatures are resisting court orders to draw additional minority opportunity districts. These actions have raised questions about the commitment to upholding voting rights within the GOP.
Republican extremism in redistricting goes beyond VRA violations. In Florida, a state judge invalidated a congressional map supported by Governor Ron DeSantis and the GOP-controlled Legislature, citing violations of the Florida Constitution. The judge noted that even the defendants had conceded this fact.
Perhaps the most striking example is in Wisconsin, where the Republican-controlled Legislature is threatening to impeach a newly elected state Supreme Court justice who is expected to play a pivotal role in redistricting cases. This move underscores the GOP’s determination to preserve gerrymandered legislative maps.
Redistricting is inherently political, with the power to shape electoral outcomes. However, adherence to the law is crucial in maintaining a fair and just political system. The current disregard for legal obligations by some Republican state legislatures is a cause for concern.
These actions may have been deemed scandalous in normal times, but the influence of former President Donald Trump has transformed the GOP’s perspective on the law. The party now sees following the law as a weakness and compliance with court orders as optional, even celebrating actions that hinder Black voters’ access to fair representation.
Despite the imperfections of the judiciary, the contrast between courts upholding the law and the GOP’s lawlessness in redistricting is striking. Republican leaders seem perplexed by their legal setbacks, highlighting a growing divide between their expectations and the principles upheld by the courts.