The U.S. Supreme Court has reinstated a congressional district map in Alabama that favors Republicans, overturning a previous ruling that deemed it racially discriminatory.
Key points
Supreme Court reinstated Alabama's congressional district map
Map favored by Republicans
Overturned previous ruling by a three-judge panel
Panel found map racially discriminatory
The U.S. Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Alabama to use a congressional district map favored by Republicans.
The court overturned a three-judge district court panel that found that the map is "tainted by intentional race-based discrimination."
The ruling means that Alabama's 2026 midterm elections will feature six Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning one, as opposed to a map with only five safe Republican seats. Democrat Shomari Figures, who represents Alabama's Second District, will likely lose his seat as a result of the high court's ruling.
The story of Alabama's congressional map is long and tortured. It began in 2021, when the state implemented a new map to account for population changes in the census. The map featured only one majority-black districtout of seven, even though the state is more than one-quarter Black.
Voters immediately sued, claiming the map illegally diluted minority votes in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Lower court judges agreed, ruling that the state must draw a map with two districts where Black voters have a realistic chance of electing their candidate of choice. The Supreme Court more than once has ordered Alabama to draw a compliant map.
But the state has refused and instead continued to litigate the case. On Tuesday, that tactic paid off.
What changed? In April, the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority all but gutted what remains of the Voting Rights Act, ruling that states cannot purposefully draw districts that are majority-minority.
Q&A
What did the Supreme Court decide regarding Alabama's congressional districts?
The Supreme Court reinstated a congressional district map in Alabama that is favored by Republicans.
Why was the Alabama congressional district map previously challenged?
The map was challenged because a three-judge district court panel found it to be tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.
What implications does the Supreme Court's ruling have for Alabama elections?
The ruling allows Alabama to proceed with a congressional map that may influence the outcome of future elections in favor of Republicans.
How did the Supreme Court's decision affect the previous district court ruling?
The Supreme Court's decision overturned the previous ruling by the three-judge panel that deemed the map racially discriminatory.
Family courts show ‘widespread’ gender bias and victim-blaming, report finds
A report reveals significant gender bias and victim-blaming in family courts, adversely affecting women. It highlights that 72.5% of analyzed judgments contained victim-blaming language, primarily targeting mothers.
See every story in News — including breaking news and analysis.
Alabama then asked the high court to reinstate their old map, under the theory that this new ruling meant that it was permissible to use a map with only one majority-Black district. In an unsigned, unexplained order, the high court essentially reversed its previous opinions, and allowed Alabama to use the old map for the upcoming midterm elections.
This set off a flurry of activity in Alabama. By the time the Supreme Court issued its May order, absentee balloting had already begun, using the court-drawn map. So Republican Governor Kay Ivey cancelled elections and scheduled a special primary for August for the affected congressional races.
The case, however, was not over.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court had ordered a lower court panel to continue evaluating Alabama's map in light of its recent Voting Rights Act decision. And just 15 days after that order, the panel, composed of three Republican judges—two of them Trump appointees—concluded unanimously that even under the Supreme Court's new standards, the plan for a single black district was "intentionally discriminatory."
So, once again, Alabama returned to the Supreme Court, arguing that the map was partisan, not racially discriminatory. In short, that the Republican legislature simply drew the map to elect more Republicans. And that under the Supreme Court's new interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, the GOP map should be allowed to stand.
The court's three liberals publicly dissented, castigating the conservative majority for failing to abide by its 2006 decision in the case of Purcell v. Gonzalez. That decision declared that courts should not change election rules too close to an election.
Tuesday's decision is the latest in a series of Supreme Court rulings that could well reshape the 2026 midterm elections, making it much harder for Democrats to prevail.
