U.S. Supreme Court, April 9, 2026 photo The court on Monday struck down a 2023 order preventing Alabama from using a map it found racially discriminatory, sending the case back to lower courts. (Photo: Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 2023 ruling blocking the operate of a congressional map that courts found racially discriminatory, a move that could clear the way for Alabama to operate recent district lines this year.
The order from the nation’s highest court in the case, collectively known as Allen v. Milligan, came about a week before the state’s May 19 primary election and about a week and a half after the court significantly weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prevents racial discrimination in voting laws, in a case known as Louisiana v. Callais.
The ruling said plaintiffs challenging Section 2 maps must show intentional discrimination to prevail.
As is common practice, the majority did not express an opinion until Monday’s order.
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the order, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, saying there was no reason to rehear the Alabama case.
“In addition to claiming that Alabama’s 2023 redistricting plan violates [Section] 2, the district court held in one of three cases before the Court that Alabama violated the Fourteenth Amendment by intentionally diluting the votes of Black voters in Alabama,” Sotomayor wrote. “This constitutional finding of intentional discrimination is independent and unaffected by any of the legal issues discussed in Callais.”
The state is currently using a congressional map drawn by a special master appointed by a federal court in 2023 after courts ruled that the congressional map approved by the Alabama Legislature in 2021 discriminated against Black voters in the state by not giving them a full chance to elect their preferred leaders. The United States Supreme Court upheld this decision verdict in 2023after its implementation was delayed for more than a year, after the 2022 half-term.
The recent map drawn up by the legislator in 2023 was also considered a violation of Art. 2 of the Voting Rights Act. On the current map, the 2nd Congressional District, currently represented by U.S. Rep. Shomari Figurs, D-Mobile, has a Black voting-age population (BVAP) of about 49%, while the 7th Congressional District, represented by Birmingham-based Republican U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, has a BVAP rate of about 52%.
Section 2 was significantly weakened by the U.S. Supreme Court in April this year Louisiana v. Callaiswhich stated that plaintiffs challenging congressional maps had to prove intentional discrimination, a much higher bar than previous standards for showing discriminatory effects.
“The Court’s decision interferes with the ongoing election and casts doubt on the validity of the votes of thousands of early voters,” said Deuel Ross, director of litigation at the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), which represented the plaintiffs in the Milligan case. “We will consider all of our options to protect voter rights and restore the court-ordered map.
A message seeking comment was received from Gov. Kay Ivey on Monday evening. Marshall said federal courts “punished” the state for drawing its own maps, but the Supreme Court “affirmed the state’s long-held position.”
“For too long, unelected federal judges have had more to say about Alabama’s elections than Alabama voters. That ended today,” Marshall said in a speech video posted on social media. “My job in this office was to put the Legislature in the best possible legal position to draw a congressional map that favors Republicans 7-0.”
Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen said in a statement Monday that the ruling represents a “historic victory” for Alabama.
“The primary elections will be held on May 19 as scheduled,” the statement said. “My office will remain in close contact with the Governor’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office as the situation continues to evolve.”
Senate President Pro Tem Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman, said in a statement Monday that the court’s ruling “cleared the way for Alabama to conduct free, open and fair elections using constitutional maps drawn by the Legislature rather than unconstitutional maps imposed on the state by activist federal judges.”
“The Supreme Court’s action takes the thumb off the scale in legislative and congressional elections and allows Republicans to once again have a fair chance to compete,” the statement said.
Republicans control all statewide elected offices; both U.S. Senate seats; five of seven seats in the United States House of Representatives; 76 of 105 seats in the House of Representatives and 27 of 35 seats in the Senate.
Kim Bailey, president of the League of Women Voters of Alabama, said Monday that the decision is “deeply disappointing and creates uncertainty and confusion among voters about the 2026 elections.”
“We encourage voters not to be disappointed or discouraged,” the statement said. “Your vote matters. Your vote matters. And voter turnout will remain one of the most powerful tools we have to shape our future and defend representative democracy.”
“An inextricable, constant feature of this case.”
“The Supreme Court has undermined our election jurisprudence and done so in a way that seriously and systematically disadvantages black voters,” said Dev Wakeley, a labor policy advocate at Alabama Arise. “The idea that they provide a more level playing field or that the protections against discrimination that we previously had until Callais were ready to be abolished is absurd.”
On Tuesday, the court sent the case back to a three-judge panel with instructions to reconsider the ruling in lightweight of the Callais ruling. Using the 2023 map would reduce the BVAP in the 7th Congressional District, represented by Sewell, to 50.6% and reduce the BVAP in the 2nd Congressional District, represented by the numbers, to less than 40%. This would likely cast Numbers’ re-election into doubt.
Data in Monday’s statement called the court’s action “an extremely unfortunate decision” and said the conservative justices had “simply literally replaced themselves with defenders of the state of Alabama.”
“I ran for this seat to be the voice of all of Alabama, and I am not backing down from that mission now,” the statement said. “The fight must continue and will continue. Outside the courts, we know what needs to be done. We will organize, register and take a record number of people to the polls.”
Sewell, in a statement Monday, called the ruling “a stunning change” but said the decision would not be the final word.
“Black Alabamians have fought too hard and sacrificed too much to be distracted from extremist politicians and activist court,” the statement said. “Black voters make up nearly one-third of Alabama’s electorate, and we deserve at least two seats from which to elect the candidate of our choice.”
Sotomayor noted that the Callais court concluded that its ruling in Allen v. Milligan — upholding racial discrimination findings in congressional maps — remains “good law.”
“The Court’s finding of vote dilution due to racial discrimination is an inherent, enduring feature of this case, and the State of Alabama’s conscious decision to respond by perpetuating rather than remediating that dilution is, as the District Court correctly held, evidence of discriminatory intent,” Sotomayor wrote.
After the session
Last week, the Alabama State Legislature approved two bills allowing recent primaries to be held in districts that would be affected by the court’s overturning of previous orders. Lawmakers continued this process despite protests throughout the week this resulted in one person being removed from the statehouse on the last day of the special session.
Plaintiffs in the Milligan case filed briefs Monday, arguing that the order should remain in place because the current remediation map does not take race into account.
“The district court never held that Section 2 required the State of Alabama to adopt a majority-black district or otherwise draw districts based on voter race,” the plaintiffs said in their response. “The district court’s remedial plan is proof positive: it does not cover the majority-black second district and was ‘prepared with race-blindness in mind.’
Opponents say the core bills passed by the Legislature last week may be unconstitutional under the 2022 amendment which requires changes to the electoral law to be introduced no later than six months before the elections. The date this year was May 3; the special session began on May 4. Republicans said last week that the amendment applied to the general election, not the primary.
This is groundbreaking news. Updated at 17:58 with additional background; at 6:11 p.m., with comments from Senate President Pro Tem Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman; at 6:25 p.m. with comments from Secretary of State Wes Allen and plaintiffs’ documents in the Milligan case; at 6:48 p.m. with comments from U.S. Rep. Shomari Figurs, D-Mobile; and at 7:11 p.m. with comments from Attorney General Steve Marshall from a video posted on social media. Updated at 7:08 a.m. to correct BVAP numbers in the 2nd and 7th Congressional Districts and to add a comment from U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Birmingham.
Allen v. Milligan, May 12, 2026
This story was originally produced by Alabama reflectorwhich is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network that includes the Ohio Capital Journal and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
