Alabama Seeks Supreme Court Approval to Revert to One Black-Majority Congressional District Alabama has filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, requesting permission to use a congressional map that includes only one majority-Black district. The state’s move comes amid heightened tensions over voting rights and redistricting, with the high court facing a pivotal question about the role of partisanship in shaping electoral boundaries. The appeal, which seeks a decision by May 14, follows a lower court ruling that blocked Alabama from implementing its 2023-drawn map. The case is closely tied to the Supreme Court’s recent decision on Louisiana’s congressional map, which significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Alabama’s appeal argues that its situation mirrors Louisiana’s, urging the justices to allow the state to proceed with its current map based on “lawful policy goals” rather than racial considerations. State officials, including Governor Kay Ivey, have emphasized that the map aligns with their legislative priorities and does not discriminate based on race. The appeal’s timing is critical, as Alabama’s legislature has already passed legislation enabling new House primaries if courts approve the use of the 2023 map. This could reshape the state’s electoral landscape for this year’s midterms, potentially giving Republicans an advantage in a district currently represented by Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures, a Black voter. The state’s previous map, which included two Black-majority districts, was reviewed by the Supreme Court in 2023 and required revision. Alabama’s new map, however, maintains only one such district.#alabama #u_s_supreme_court #kay_ivey #samuel_alito #shomari_figures
La Corte Suprema anula el mapa electoral de Louisiana, limitando la Ley de Derecho al Voto La Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos anuló el mapa electoral vigente en Louisiana, considerándolo inconstitucional por gerrymandering. La decisión, tomada el miércoles, se basó en la opinión mayoritaria del juez Samuel Alito, respaldada por seis jueces, y fue rechazada por tres. El fallo se produce en un contexto de disputas nacionales sobre el rediseño de distritos electorales, con estados republicanos intentando mantener el control del Partido Republicano (GOP) en la Cámara de Representantes y estados demócratas buscando contrarrestar esa ventaja. El mapa anulado, trazado a principios de 2024, añadió un segundo legislador negro y demócrata a la delegación estatal de Louisiana, que es mayoría republicana. La decisión deja sin efecto ese diseño, lo que afecta la representación política del estado. La secretaria de Estado de Louisiana, Nancy Landry, indicó que los abogados del estado analizan el fallo, pero no se pueden hacer declaraciones públicas debido a que el caso se remitió al Distrito Occidental para continuar los procedimientos. Las elecciones primarias de mitad de mandato de Louisiana están programadas para el 16 de mayo, con votación anticipada que comenzará el 2 de mayo. Sin embargo, las papeletas para votantes en el extranjero y el personal militar se envían basándose en el mapa antiguo, lo que genera incertidumbre sobre cómo se manejará la situación. La Corte no estableció instrucciones claras para reemplazar el mapa antes de las elecciones, lo que complica los esfuerzos de los legisladores del estado. El fallo ha sido criticado por líderes de derechos civiles, quienes lo describieron como una amenaza para los derechos electorales.#samuel_alito #corte_suprema #nancy_landry #naacp #aclu_luisiana
Supreme Court Examines Legal Boundaries of Post-Election Day Mail-In Ballots The U.S. Supreme Court is deliberating over a pivotal case that questions whether states can legally count mail-in ballots submitted after Election Day. The dispute centers on Mississippi’s law, enacted during the pandemic, which permits ballots to be received up to five days after the election as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. The case has drawn sharp scrutiny from conservative justices, who argue the law could undermine election integrity by creating ambiguity about when votes are finalized. Justice Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh raised concerns that the state’s approach might facilitate fraudulent voting or lead voters to suspect fraud if late ballots alter the outcome of a close race. They questioned whether allowing post-Election Day ballots could erode public trust in the electoral process, particularly if the final results shift after the initial count. The justices also highlighted the potential for confusion if voters attempt to recall ballots already in the mail, a scenario Justice Gorsuch illustrated with a hypothetical involving a candidate’s sudden scandal. The case has broader implications for election procedures, as 14 states and Washington, D.C., already accept mail ballots after Election Day, including key battleground states like Nevada. However, other states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin require ballots to be received by the deadline. Mississippi and the Republican National Committee (RNC) are relying on a 1997 Supreme Court ruling, Foster v. Love, which invalidated Louisiana’s system of electing congressional candidates in October, effectively holding a general election in November.#supreme_court #brett_kavanaugh #mississippi #samuel_alito #rnc
