Alabama Republicans defy the U.S. Supreme Court.

[link removed]
07/28/2023

Progress made is progress that can be lost. This week we cover the 12 congressional maps that are playing out in courts across the country as we head into 2024. In Tennessee and North Carolina, people with past felony convictions fight for their right to vote as the states change their laws.

Just a month has passed since the 10-year anniversary of Shelby County v. Holder ([link removed]) . In the 2013 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the Voting Rights Act's (VRA) preclearance provision was no longer needed because "our country has changed" and that blatant defiance of federal orders is "rare."

Alabama’s blatant disregard for the U.S. Supreme Court’s order to redraw its congressional map with two Black-majority districts shows, as Marc wrote ([link removed]) , how “little has changed.”

============================================================

From New York to Texas: 40 Congressional Districts Are Being Challenged Ahead of 2024

In close national elections like the 2022 midterm elections, the ** outcome of litigation ([link removed])
can have a huge impact on the final results. The decisions of courts in redistricting litigation ** contributed ([link removed])
to the Republican Party’s current margin in the U.S. House of Representatives. With 12 congressional maps still subject to litigation and at least 40 districts at issue, decisions in numerous cases stand to impact control of the House in 2024 and beyond.
** ([link removed])

Ongoing congressional redistricting litigation has the potential to determine how communities are represented in states across the country, remedy discrimination in map-drawing and have implications for partisan gerrymandering claims.

According to Democracy Docket’s ** database ([link removed])
of over 600 lawsuits, there are currently 26 lawsuits across 12 states that challenge congressional maps; 20 lawsuits are pending in federal court and six cases are pending in state court.

In federal court, pro-voting forces across the deep south are fighting congressional maps that dilute voting strength of Black voters. For example, in Texas, seven consolidated federal lawsuits are seeking to ensure voters of color have the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. Many of these cases bring claims under ** Section 2 of the VRA ([link removed])
, which was recently upheld in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in ** Allen v. Milligan ([link removed])
. In state courts, another bucket of lawsuits challenge partisan gerrymandering, unconstitutional processes and more.

** Learn about the districts that may shift ahead of 2024 here ([link removed])
.

Two Black-Majority Districts is Far Too Many for Republicans

Alabama continues to be one of the states with ongoing congressional redistricting litigation that we are closely following.

After ** signing ([link removed])
a new congressional map with only one majority-Black district — in defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court — Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) stated that the GOP-controlled “Legislature knows our state, our people and our districts better than the federal courts or activist groups, and I am pleased that they answered the call, remained focused and produced new districts ahead of the court deadline.”

This ** new map ([link removed])
has a 39.93% Black voting-age population in the state’s 2nd Congressional District and 50.65% in the 7th Congressional District. The map clearly lacks a second district that would allow Black voters to have the opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice, plainly violating the district court’s 2022 ** order ([link removed])
— a decision the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed last month — which stated that “any remedial plan will need to include two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.”

According to ** reporting ([link removed])
, the sponsor of the map, Rep. Steve Livingston (R-Scottsboro), ** stated ([link removed])
that he spoke with U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and McCarthy said “I’m interested in keeping my majority.”
* At the county level, other maps in Alabama are under similar scrutiny this week. Civil rights organizations ** asked ([link removed])
a federal court to block the map for the Jefferson County, Alabama commission. The groups argue that the districts in the state’s most populous county are racially gerrymandered to "crack" and "pack" Black voters in the Birmingham-based county.

In another attempt to avoid drawing a second Black-majority district, Louisiana Republicans also ** objected ([link removed])
to a federal court's order to redraw the state's congressional map to comply with the VRA. The officials are asking for a full trial to determine if Louisiana's map violates Section 2 of the VRA. This request was made in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in ** Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College ([link removed])
, which held that “statutes requiring race-based classification…necessarily become obsolete.” Louisiana Republicans suggest this means that Section 2 — which they ** contend ([link removed])
similarly requires classifying voters based on their race — may also no longer apply to Louisiana. To support this alarming argument, they point to Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurrence in ** Allen v. Milligan ([link removed])
.
* Like in Alabama, the plaintiffs in the Louisiana case allege that Black voters are “packed” into one majority-Black district and “cracked” among the five other districts in order to dilute their voting power in violation of the VRA and assert that the appropriate remedy is a map with two majority-Black districts.

Black Voters Fight for Representation With Section 2 Lawsuits

Earlier this week, a federal judge ** dismissed ([link removed])
a lawsuit in Arkansas challenging the methods used to elect Arkansas Supreme Court justices and appellate court judges. It was a blow to Black voters seeking better representation in the state’s judicial selection process.

In addition to the Arkansas lawsuit, there are ** two other lawsuits ([link removed])
with Section 2 claims that focus on the way people can elect their judicial representatives in Louisiana and Mississippi. Each lawsuit deals with fair and equal representation — or, more accurately, the alleged lack thereof — of Black voters in the state’s judicial selection process. In particular, the ongoing ** 40-year-old lawsuit ([link removed])
out of Louisiana highlights the need to keep tools that protect minorities in place and how voters are still fighting to have their voices heard.
This need is further highlighted by the blatant disregard that Republicans in Alabama have displayed this week by passing a map that violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s directive handed down to the legislators just a month ago.
** ([link removed])

** Alabama Shows Our Country Hasn't Changed ([link removed])

By Marc Elias

Getting Out of Jail Does Not Give You a Free to Vote Card

In a new memo, the state of Tennessee ** announced ([link removed])
that an individual convicted of a felony must now receive a pardon or court order to regain the right to vote, adding new hurdles to an already arduous rights restoration process.

The change was made in light of last month’s decision in ** Falls v. Goins ([link removed])
, in which the Tennessee Supreme Court ** upheld ([link removed])
a disenfranchisement scheme that prohibits certain individuals with out-of-state felony convictions from voting in Tennessee. Tennessee has what is known as a ** pay-to-vote ([link removed])
law, which requires individuals to pay all fees, fines or other debts related to their conviction before being eligible for enfranchisement.
* Currently, ** more than 9% ([link removed])
of the voting-age population in Tennessee cannot vote due to a felony conviction, according to the Sentencing Project. In addition, Tennessee is one of several states where more than ** one in 10 ([link removed])
Black individuals are disenfranchised.

In North Carolina, another state with a pay-to-vote law, a trial was ** scheduled ([link removed])
for April 1, 2024 in a federal lawsuit challenging the state's law that criminalizes voting while on felony parole, probation or post-release supervision — even if the individuals were told they are eligible to vote. The groups who brought the lawsuit argue that the law intentionally discriminates against Black North Carolinians.
Wealth-based disenfranchisement was outlawed in 1964 with the adoption of the ** 24th Amendment ([link removed])
, however, in several states people with past felony convictions are still held to a different standard that advocates ** argue ([link removed])
is unconstitutional and discriminatory.

More News
* In New York, Republicans ** appealed ([link removed])
a decision that requires the Independent Redistricting Commission to redraw the state's congressional map, giving New York’s highest court the final say. Five Republican members of the commission also ** appealed ([link removed])
the decision.
* In a new filing, the Democratic Party of New Mexico ** asked ([link removed])
to defend the state's congressional map in a legal challenge from the Republican Party of New Mexico. The Republicans are arguing that the map is gerrymandered to unfairly favor Democrats.
* In California, a federal judge ** dismissed ([link removed])
a lawsuit seeking to overturn the state’s laws permitting universal mail-in voting, online voter registration, community ballot collection and more. The plaintiffs failed to prove that they are harmed by these laws, the judge ruled.
* In a win for voters with disabilities, a federal court temporarily ** blocked ([link removed])
a Mississippi law that restricted who could help voters return their completed mail-in ballots.
* Democrats in Washington, D.C. reintroduced two democracy-related bills yesterday. One, introduced in the House, would ** strengthen ([link removed])
congressional oversight of the executive branch among other provisions. The second, introduced in the Senate, would ** protect ([link removed])
election workers.

OPINION: Sheriffs Undermine Democracy Through Nullification
** ([link removed])

By Jessica Pishko, an independent journalist and lawyer who focuses on how the criminal justice system and how law enforcement intersects with political power. As a contributor to Democracy Docket, Pishko writes about the criminalization of elections and how sheriffs in particular have become a growing threat to democracy. ** Read more ([link removed])
➡️
** ([link removed])

Tote around your latest book and Democracy Docket Nalgene!

** Head to the shop here ([link removed])
.

What We're Doing

We are reading an ** article ([link removed])
from the Center for Public Integrity on the consequences of the North Carolina Republican Party’s decade-long mission to claim the state’s highest court. Did you know that in the Tar Heel State, people with past felony convictions held the right to vote for 276 days before the state Supreme Court ** reversed its decision ([link removed])
in April?

This week marks the 33rd anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. To celebrate, we are learning more about the intersection between voting rights and accessibility.

According to the
** ACLU ([link removed])
, over 11% of voters with disabilities reported difficulties casting a ballot in 2020. Policies like bans on drop boxes, restrictions on absentee voting and criminalizing ballot-return assistance harm disabled voters as ** restrictions ([link removed])
make it harder for people to elect representatives who will advocate for them.

It’s summer break for our podcast, Defending Democracy! So, there won’t be a new episode until after Labor Day. But, it’s the perfect time to catch up on everything that has been covered so far this year. Listen on ** Apple ([link removed])
, ** Spotify ([link removed])
or ** wherever you get your podcasts ([link removed])
.
** Democracy Docket Twitter ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Website (democracydocket.com)
** Democracy Docket Instagram ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Facebook ([link removed])
** Defending Democracy Podcast ([link removed])
We depend on the support of our readers to keep bringing you the latest on the fight for democracy. You can help ** keep our content free ([link removed])
and available for all today. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.

Copyright © 2023 Democracy Docket, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
250 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20001