Oct. 5 (UPI) — A special federal three-judge panel has chosen a new congressional map in Alabama after previous versions drawn by Republican state lawmakers diluted the power of Black voters and were struck down.
The panel chose Remedial Map 3, a plan that remedies the original map proposed in January 2022 by the lawmakers later found to be racially gerrymandered in violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, according to court documents obtained by UPI.
The map keeps in place the state’s lone Black-majority district and brings the Black population in another district to 48.7% of the total population while better respecting existing city and community boundaries.
The panel was made up of two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump, District Judge Anna Manasco and District Judge Terry Moorer, as well as Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus — an appointee of former President Bill Clinton.
A federal district court previously concluded that the “appropriate” remedy would be to create an additional district that had either a majority of Black voters or enough to where they have “an opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.”
The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court in June, which affirmed the lower court’s order.
Alabama redrew the map and submitted it again without obeying the decision of the courts — which led to the ire of a panel of federal judges that rejected the second design. The panel ordered a court-appointed special master to come up with a new map that would comply with federal law.
In an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, Alabama again made a last-ditch effort to keep its gerrymandered map but the high court refused.
The map selected Thursday was one of three proposed by the special master.
“The Secretary and the Legislators object generally to all the Special Master’s Remedial Plans on the ground that the Special Master allowed race to predominate over traditional districting principles,” the panel wrote.
“In essence, this is the same argument that we and the Supreme Court have rejected at each successive stage of this litigation — that any map that fails to ‘meet or beat’ the 2023 Plan on traditional districting criteria favored by the State necessarily allows race to predominate in its creation.”
The court further found that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Khadidah Stone and Evan Milligan, would suffer “irreparable harm” if they were to vote in the 2024 elections based on the unlawful redistricting plan and that the injunction enforcing the new map is in the public interest.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall complained about the court’s decision in a statement and alleged that the selected map also violated the U.S. Constitution for “guarantee of equality for all.” However, he said the state would abide by the court’s decision.
