After repeatedly drawing racially biased maps and defying court orders, the state could face consequences for continuing to dilute minority votes. A federal court has already chastised Alabama for its refusal to comply with the law.
Friday, June 20
View in browser ([link removed] )
NL-Header_OTD-4 ([link removed] )
On June 24 at 7 p.m. ET, join Democracy Docket members for a live Zoom Q&A ([link removed] ) with founder Marc Elias. Be part of a community of thousands of like-minded individuals committed to protecting democracy — and get the clear answers you’re looking for.
THIS WEEK
- Alabama, after defying court orders, could be back under federal oversight for its next redistricting plan
- Ruling ensures Maine voters will know the truth about ID ballot measure
- Georgia GOP sues to put election deniers on local board
ALABAMA
The state could be put under federal oversight (again)
The current redistricting cycle has been a long-running legal saga ([link removed] ) for Alabamians. The state drew racially discriminatory congressional maps in 2021, defied federal court orders to add another majority-Black district, approved new maps that were struck down by the same (outraged) federal court, appealed ([link removed] ) again to the U.S. Supreme Court and is now at risk of being put under federal supervision.
In a scathing ruling last month, a panel of three federal judges – two of whom were appointed by President Donald Trump – concluded ([link removed] ) that the Alabama Legislature “intentionally ignored a federal court order for the purpose of (again) diluting minority votes” and could make the same move “again, and again, and again.”
Given Alabama’s refusal to comply with court orders, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, a group of Black voters, want the state put back under federal preclearance – in which a state or locality must get federal approval before it can make changes to election-related maps, laws or policies. (Most southern states, because of their histories of racial discrimination in voting, were under this system until 2013, when the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder.)
In its ruling last month, the court did not signal how it could rule on the request. But it did make a point of saying Alabama had proven itself unwilling to follow the law when it wasn’t under federal preclearance.
“The 2020 redistricting cycle in Alabama — the first cycle in 50 years that Alabama has been free of the strictures of federal preclearance — did not have to turn out this way,” the court wrote. “We wish it had not, but we have eyes to see the veritable mountain of evidence that it did.”
Alabama filed ([link removed] ) a brief this week arguing preclearance would be “inappropriate and unconstitutional” unless it had “engaged in such widespread and persistent discrimination that case-by-case litigation is inadequate to protect the right to vote.” The plaintiffs haven’t cleared that hurdle, the state argued.
Of course, even if Alabama is placed under federal preclearance, it’s unclear how much that will protect minority voters in the state. Under Trump, the ability of the Department of Justice’s civil rights ([link removed] ) division to fight racial discrimination in voting has been decimated.
Still, if nothing else, taking away Alabama’s right to set its own congressional map would send a stark message about the ongoing persistence of racial bias in voting — six decades after Congress aimed to end it once and for all. Read more about Alabama’s legal battle here. ([link removed] )
MAINE
Ruling ensures Maine voters will know the truth about ID ballot measure
A state court ruled ([link removed] ) to protect Maine voters by keeping ([link removed] ) the wording of a citizen-initiated ballot question, to go before voters this November, that would significantly restrict access to the ballot.
The measure would make several changes to Maine election laws, including creating photo ID requirements for in-person voting and absentee voting, eliminating ongoing mail voter status, imposing new restrictions on ballot drop boxes, and banning prepaid postage on mail ballot return envelopes.
A group of supporters of the measure had alleged ([link removed] ) that Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D), who is responsible for proposing and approving ballot questions, misleadingly wrote the ballot question to cast it in a negative light.
Bellows has made no secret about her opposition to the measure, commenting publicly that voter ID laws are “the new means of voter suppression” and that the Maine initiative would put voting access at “extreme risk.”
But, in a win for voters, the court concluded that the wording is “understandable and not misleading.”
In other words, the court essentially confirmed, if this effort to make voting more difficult sounds like a bad idea that deserves to be defeated, that’s because of its substance — not the way it was worded. On Wednesday, the petitioners filed ([link removed] ) an appeal. Read more about the Maine lawsuit here. ([link removed] )
GEORGIA
The GOP is fighting to put election deniers on a key election board
Republicans are fighting ([link removed] ) to install two prominent election deniers on the board of elections in Fulton County, home to Atlanta. It’s the latest Georgia lawsuit to signal ([link removed] ) the 2026 election is already taking shape in court.
The Fulton County GOP filed ([link removed] ) a lawsuit arguing the county’s board of commissioners violated state law by rejecting ([link removed] ) their nominees, and it’s asking the court to order their appointments to the board.
The party wants the board of commissioners to reappoint Julie Adams and add right-wing activist Jason Frazier. Adams refused ([link removed] ) to certify primary election results last year and has ties ([link removed] ) to the far-right Election Integrity Network, while Frazier has challenged over 10,000 voter registrations in Fulton County.
“It’s not possible to work with folks trying to sow discord and chaos,” Commissioner Mo Ivory said ([link removed] ) before voting to reject Adams’ reappointment.
The GOP insists its nominees meet the specified qualifications and therefore must be approved by the board. Read more about the Georgia lawsuit here. ([link removed] )
OPINION
DOJ and North Carolina Collude to Tighten Voting Rules
Screenshot 2025-06-18 at 1.58.27 PM ([link removed] )
Since Trump took office, we’ve seen the U.S. Department of Justice turned on its head: the voting section has been nearly eliminated ([link removed] ) , a top anti-voting attorney is at the helm ([link removed] ) and the agency has been dropping ([link removed] ) some of its pro-voter lawsuits and reversing ([link removed] ) its stance in others.
And in North Carolina and Texas, it’s testing a new tactic: filing lawsuits in collusion with Republican defendants to make sweeping policy changes.
Just after Republicans took control ([link removed] ) last month of North Carolina’s State Board of Elections, the DOJ sued the board to make changes to voter registration – and the defendants have said they have no intention of fighting back. It’s a troubling strategy, Billy Corriher, the state courts manager for People’s Parity Project, writes ([link removed] ) in an opinion piece for Democracy Docket.
“The DOJ benefits by getting an easy win, and by seeming to deliver on the Trump administration’s promise to supporters to tighten voting rules,” Corriher writes. Read more here. ([link removed] )
NEW VIDEO
The Supreme Court's Powered by GOP Lies and Bad Vibes | "Strict Scrutiny" Host Leah Litman
As Republicans work on betraying the American people, Democrats are finding a path forward. "Strict Scrutiny" host and Michigan Law Professor Leah Litman joins Marc to discuss the Supreme Court’s long game, teaching constitutional law during a constitutional crisis, and the search for the Democratic Joe Rogan. Watch on YouTube here. ([link removed] )
What We’re Doing
We loved seeing so many of you show up at No Kings protests, joining millions of people across the country to demonstrate that the opposition in the U.S. is mobilized.
Here are some of our favorite signs from the protests:
photo-collage-02 ([link removed] )
Facebook ([link removed] )
X ([link removed] )
Instagram ([link removed] )
Bluesky_Logo-grey (2) ([link removed] )
YouTube ([link removed] )
Website ([link removed] )
TikTok ([link removed] )
This is one of our free weekly newsletters. If you were forwarded this email, you can subscribe to our newsletters here ([link removed] ) .
Unsubscribe ([link removed] ) | Manage Preferences ([link removed] ) | Donate ([link removed] )
Democracy Docket, LLC
250 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 400
Washington, D.C., 20009
