UH HUH
UH HUH
The Washington Post
@washingtonpost
The Supreme Court allowed Alabama to hold upcoming elections using a congressional map that a lower court found discriminates on the basis of race and dilutes the political power of the state’s Black voters.
https://x.com/washingtonpost/status/2062134465753666015
Norman Ornstein
@NormOrnstein
Our chief justice, John “Jim Crow” Roberts
8:19 AM · Jun 4, 2026
Democracy Docket
@DemocracyDocket
LAST NIGHT: Alabama is allowed to use a congressional map in the 2026 midterms that was found to intentionally discriminate against Black voters, the Supreme Court ruled.The decision suggests that almost no federal protections remain for non-white voters.
https://x.com/DemocracyDocket/status/2062166085151883390
Ari Berman@ariberman.bsky.social
Roberts Court wants to create world where Dems have no legitimate chance to ever take control of Congress, there are no Black members of Congress from the South & no voting rights violations can ever be proven. Their end goal is permanent white GOP minority rule http://www.motherjones.com/politics/202…
https://bsky.app/profile/ariberman.bsky.social/post/3mnfckykm5c2r
From TPM:
SCOTUS Cobbles Together Excuse to Let Alabama Discriminate Against Black Voters in New Order
by Kate Riga
06.02.26 | 11:45 pm
The Supreme Court showed beyond a doubt Tuesday that it will never again put a stop to Republican states snuffing out the Black vote.
The six right-wing justices granted Alabama’s request for a stay, which clears the way for the state to hold its 2026 elections under a 2023 map crafted to deliver Republicans six congressional seats and Democrats only one. It does so by making Black Alabamians’ votes count for less than white ones’.
In Louisiana v. Callais, the Court made vote dilution nearly impossible to prove. It ignored Congress’ alterations to the Voting Rights Act and turned it back into an intents test, where the plaintiffs had to make the extremely difficult showing that the legislators intended to discriminate based on race. And yet, in the Alabama case, the plaintiffs managed to do that. The district court found plentiful evidence that the state intentionally discriminated after the court had previously ordered it to produce a map with two districts composed of a Black majority or near-majority, and Alabama flatly ignored it. The state instead produced another map with only one Black-majority district.
That evidence, rare in its unambiguity, still failed at the Supreme Court.
“As to intentional vote dilution, the District Court did not heed the presumption of legislative good faith because it interpreted the State’s legal disagreement with the court’s earlier remedial order as proof of discriminatory animus,” the majority wrote.
In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Court’s order proves that “there is no realistic case in which the presumption of legislative good faith can ever be rebutted.” It also, she added, “corrodes the rule of law by rewarding Alabama’s gamesmanship and outright defiance of court orders.”
The majority then delivers the death blow to any attempt to stop red states from suppressing the Black vote.
“Under Callais, the District Court was required to deny relief unless the plaintiffs’ alternative map performed ‘just as well’ with respect to all of the State’s constitutionally permissible districting criteria,” it wrote.
In other words, courts can only force red states to draw additional majority-minority districts if those districts will vote for Republican candidates. Since this will never happen in the South, where race and partisanship are intertwined, it ensures that red states’ efforts to gerrymander Republican candidates into easy wins will always trump Black voters’ ability to elect members of Congress who represent their interests.
SCOTUS Justice Blasts Colleagues in Scathing Dissent
LAW AND DISORDER
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority voted to greenlight Republicans’ power grab in a new state.
Janna Brancolini
Updated Jun. 3 2026 7:35AM EDT
Published Jun. 3 2026 7:30AM EDT
Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted her conservative colleagues for “disregarding both democratic values and the rule of law” in a blistering dissent to a decision allowing Alabama to eliminate a majority-Black district at the 11th hour.
The justices voted 6-3 to grant an emergency request filed by Republican officials to use a congressional map in this year’s midterms that was approved in 2023 but had never been used because a lower court found the map intentionally discriminated against Black voters.
After the Supreme Court instructed the lower court to revisit its decision in light of an April ruling that weakened the Voting Rights Act (VRA), a three-judge panel of Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump appointees again found on May 26 that the map was unconstitutional.
…………..The state’s primaries were originally supposed to take place on May 19, but Alabama’s Republican leaders suspended the election while they raced to take advantage of Callais to eliminate one of the state’s two majority-Black districts and boost Republicans’ chances in six of the state’s seven districts.
In her dissent, Obama-appointee Sotomayor wrote that the conservative justices had rejected an “orderly election, held under a tried-and-tested congressional map” and instead chose “a chaotic election, held under a never-before-used congressional map that intentionally discriminates against Black Alabamians.”
……………………
Alabama also adopted the map “in unashamed defiance of a prior court order directly affirmed by this Court,” Sotomayor wrote.In 2023, the Supreme Court upheld a ruling rejecting another Alabama map drawn in 2021 that eliminated a majority-Black district.
“Just as Alabama doubled down on racial discrimination, the Court today doubles down on chaos,” Sotomayor wrote.
