Panel of Hawiian Appeals Court Judges Ignores Supreme Court Rulings and Invalidates Alabama's 7-0 Gerrymander, Claiming "Muh Racism"

The Supreme Court did not forbid all judicial scrutiny of gerrymandered districts. However, it made it very clear that only real, demonstrable racism was cause to intervene in a state's legislative maps, and that Democrat Party bullshit about "dilution of minority voting power" wasn't enough. "Republicans are trying to reduce Democrat congressional power and that's racist, in a way, if you think about it" wasn't enough.

An appeals court decided they're The Real Judges Here and ignored the Supreme Court ruling, citing the precedent of Muh Racism v. Muh Midterms.

Alabama Republicans sought to use a previously blocked 2023 congressional map following the Supreme Court's recent ruling curbing the use of race in the drawing of electoral districts that helped minority communities increase their representation in Congress. Under that map, Republicans were slated to gain one electoral seat by erasing a Black-majority seat held by Democrats in the southeastern part of the state.

However, the three-judge panel said Republicans must continue to use a map that has two majority-Black districts where Democrats hold significant advantages.

"Ultimately, we cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination," the federal judges wrote. "We again cannot understand the 2023 Plan as anything other than intentionally discriminatory."

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said he would appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.

"Know this: In my mind, it is not a matter of whether we win this case, only when," Marshall said.

More from Catherine Salgado at PJM:

It is unclear why Alabama officials should comply with the panel's order, given that it is in direct conflict with two rulings from the Supreme Court, a higher authority, and the Voting Rights Act. How can the judges licitly rule that Alabama must use districts that are unconstitutional and violative of the Voting Rights Act from being drawn specifically based on how many black voters there are within the limits? The U.S. Supreme Court resoundingly ruled against such gerrymandering both in Louisiana v. Callais and Allen v. Caster.

As a matter of fact, Allen v. Caster specifically involved Alabama and its black-majority districts. The Voting Rights Act forbids the districts, requiring a redrawing of the map, according to the Supreme Court ruling. Therefore, how can a federal judge panel randomly decide to rule the opposite and demand Alabama officials comply?

The panel of judges claimed that not using the map with the two race-based districts was discriminatory, which is of course nonsense, because drawing congressional maps based on the skin color of voters is inherently discriminatory. And again, the panel's claim directly violates two Supreme Court rulings and the Voting Rights Act.

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 02:25 PM

| Access Comments