Incoming, Fair Maps! Two Victories for Voters in Congressional Redistricting Fights

Alabama’s congressional map is once again in the spotlight. On Tuesday, in a massive win for voters, federal judges struck down Alabama's new congressional map, ruling that lawmakers defied a prior court order and the U.S. Supreme Court's requirement to draw a map with two majority-Black districts. The court struck down the state's redrawn congressional map and ordered a court-appointed special master to draw fair districts for 2024. 

However, the state’s Republicans are still refusing to accept the possibility of fair maps. Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen (R) quickly appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Additionally, Allen asked a federal court to pause its decision while the appeal is litigated. 

Last year, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined four conservative justices to keep the map in place due to the proximity to the 2022 midterms. However, Kavanaugh joined the majority opinion in June 2023 that required the lawmaker’s to draw new maps and experts believe a pause of Tuesday’s ruling is unlikely this time around. If the Court declines to pause the decision, then a new map would have to be drawn ahead of 2024.

In another victory for voters, a Florida judge struck down the state’s congressional map over the weekend, ruling that the map — which was pushed through by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) — violates the state constitution by diminishing the voting power of Black Floridians.

The DeSantis map eliminated the former configuration of North Florida’s 5th Congressional District by spreading Black voters across four separate districts. By the state’s own admission, the DeSantis map has violated the state constitution by diminishing the Floridians voting power. The clincher is, however, that they argued Florida’s constitution, in fact, violates the U.S. Constitution. 

• The state has already appealed this decision, which automatically pauses the ruling pending further review. If the Florida Supreme Court accepts the appeal, a final decision must  be issued by Dec. 31, per an earlier agreement between the parties.

Elsewhere, The Fight for Fair Maps, Or “The Bones of Democracy,” Continues 

The trial on Georgia’s legislative and congressional maps began this week. Pro-voting groups are arguing that the districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black Georgians. The trial is expected to take nine days.

The plaintiffs argue that “the 2020 census data make clear that minority voters in Georgia are sufficiently numerous and geographically compact to form a majority of eligible voters…in multiple congressional districts throughout the state, including an additional majority-Black district in the western Atlanta metropolitan area.” 

Rahul Garabadu, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, contextualized the importance of accurate, fair representation, “This is about the bones of our democracy. It might just look like lines on a map, but it has very significant implications to the future of this state.”

• Rather than adding another majority-Black district, the pro-voting groups allege that Georgia state lawmakers “cracked” and “packed” Black voters into adjacent majority-white districts. 

Litigation was able to proceed thanks to the Supreme Court’s June decision upholding Section 2 in Allen v. Milligan.

To the north, Ohio’s seemingly Sisyphean fight for a fair congressional map has come to a halt — for now and probably for better. Yesterday, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit challenging the state’s congressional map, which was struck down for being an illegal gerrymander, at the request of the pro-voting plaintiffs, who argued that it would be "the best result under the circumstances for the people of Ohio." The court ultimately agreed. 

This dismissal brings a partial sigh of relief as the Ohio Supreme Court’s newly constituted Republican-controlled majority became even more ideologically conservative following the 2022 midterm elections. This ideological shift further to the right meant that the pro-voting plaintiffs ran the risk of their lawsuit producing an even more gerrymandered congressional map if their suit proceeded. 

It is important to note that Ohio’s legislative map, which has been struck down seven times, is still being redrawn ahead of 2024.

• Also this week in Ohio’s circuitous redistricting journey, a pro-voting group has resubmitted ballot summary language for a constitutional amendment in the state that would create an independent, citizen-led redistricting commission.

Much Ado About Trial Separations in Election Subversion Indictment

All 19 defendants in the 2020 election subversion case out of Georgia have pleaded not guilty and waived their right to an in-person arraignment.

There was a hearing on Wednesday on Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro's motions to separate their trial from the rest of the defendants in the Fulton County election subversion case and each other. Their motions to sever from each other was denied. The judge has committed to an Oct. 23 trial start date for the both of them. 

The state of Georgia is planning for a four-month trial, not including jury selection, with more than 150 witnesses.

In Washington, D.C., special counsel Jack Smith has been attempting to wrangle former President Donald Trump. Smith is concerned that Trump’s comments and threats on social media will taint the pool of prospective jurors. 

Discriminatory Signature Matching Bar Too Low for Barr and Rove

A lawsuit filed by Bill Barr and Karl Rove's legal group and others seeking stricter rules for mail-in ballot signature verification in Arizona will proceed. The judge denied requests from the state and voting rights groups to dismiss the case.

Arizona voters who cast an early mail-in ballot must sign an affidavit attesting to their identity; this signature is then compared to prior signatures in the voter’s record to confirm a match. The plaintiffs allege that the secretary of state’s interpretation of Arizona’s 2019 Election Procedures Manual (EPM) governing signature matching procedures violates state law.

Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that county recorders are allowed to compare signatures on early mail-in ballot envelopes from prior elections with the voter’s signature on their current mail-in ballot envelopes in violation of Arizona law, which allegedly requires comparing signatures from a voter’s registration.

Take all of this with a grain of salt, there will be a new EPM ahead of 2024 as required by Arizona law, which may nullify the suit.

Win for Wisconsin Conservative Group, Loss for Voters

A Wisconsin court ruled that the use of the federal National Mail Voter Registration Form violates state law, ruling in favor of a conservative group's lawsuit. The order, which comes from a conservative Waukesha judge, prohibits the use of the popular form for future voter registrations in Wisconsin.

The form, which allows voters to register by mail, is provided to states by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Prior to today’s ruling, 47 states — including Wisconsin — accepted the form, making it a popular choice for third-party voter registration groups that serve diverse groups of prospective voters.

Although this ruling bans the use of the federal registration form, Wisconsin voters may still opt to register to vote online, by mail, in person at a municipal clerk’s office using a state form or even on Election Day at their polling place.

More News

• As a result of Ohio's new strict photo ID law, there was a stark increase in the number of ballots rejected during the August election compared to November 2022 due to voters lacking accepted identification.

• Civil and voting rights attorney Dale Ho was sworn in as a U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York. Read more about Senate Democrats’ efforts to diversify the federal judiciary here.

• In California, a bill aimed at Shasta County’s plan to hand count passed the state Senate this week. The legislation comes after the county voted to end its contract for voting machines and begin hand counting ballots instead.

OPINION: The Push for Hand Counting: A Step Back in Responsible Election Practices

By Sam Oliker-Friedland, the executive director of the Institute for Responsive Government, which helps policy makers find solutions that make government more efficient, accessible, and responsive. Read more ➡️

We are reading new research from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on political polarization in the United States. Here are some key takeaways: 

• Emotional polarization — the dislike and disgust between members of opposing parties based not on policies but on identity — began increasing prior to the internet and is growing most swiftly among Americans over 65,

• Emotional polarization is unlikely to be causing democratic backsliding or political violence on its own and

• The normalization of violence by political leaders may provide a sense that acting violently against The Other will be permitted, may not be punished, or could be lauded and turn one into a hero.

Summer break is coming to an end for our podcast, Defending Democracy! Stay tuned for a new episode next week. It’s the perfect time to finish catching up on everything that has been covered so far this year. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.