Alabama’s redistricting case set for 2025 trial

A federal court has set a trial date early next year in Alabama’s redistricting case.

In an order issued on Jan. 11, U.S. District Judge Anna M. Manasco said the trial would begin on Feb. 3, 2025, in Birmingham.

A federal court in early October approved a new congressional map drawn by a court-appointed special master that created a majority-Black district and a near-majority Black district.

The approval came after an almost two-year court battle in a case that has gone to the nation’s highest court twice.

The plan, drawn by Special Master Richard Allen, created a 2nd Congressional District running from Mobile County through the southern Black Belt and to the Georgia border, with a Black Voting Age Population (BVAP) of 48.7%. It also creates a 7th Congressional District in the western Black Belt and Jefferson County with a BVAP of 51.9%.

Federal court selects new Alabama congressional map

A three-judge panel in 2022 blocked a congressional map approved by the Alabama Legislature in 2021 and ordered the state to draw new congressional maps after determining that the Legislature had unconstitutionally packed Black voters into a single congressional district, the 7th, in western Alabama.

Citing the racial polarization of voting in Alabama, where white Alabamians tend to support Republicans and Black Alabamians tend to support Democrats, the court ordered the creation of a second majority-Black district “or something quite close to it.”

The Alabama Legislature in July approved a new congressional map that created a 7th Congressional District with a BVAP of 50.65% and a 2nd district with a BVAP of less than 40%. The three-judge panel rejected the map in September and sharply criticized the state for not following its instructions.

The state twice appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but both times the nation’s high court allowed the lower court ruling to stand.

The ruling blocked the state from implementing its map but was not a final resolution of the case. State officials said last fall they would abide by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling but planned to continue litigating the case. The map approved by the court will remain in effect.

Both plaintiffs and the state will meet and discuss a proposed pretrial schedule by Feb. 12 this year and a status conference is set for Feb. 21.

According to a status report filed late December, the parties “discussed this case in good faith” but could not agree to a schedule. Plaintiffs wanted a trial set around July or August, while the state proposed a trial in December.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote that the case has been ongoing for two years and the court heard sufficient evidence.

“Since the Supreme Court’s remand in June, Defendants have already had over seven months to conduct discovery and seek out additional experts. There is no just reason to further delay Plaintiffs’ a trial and final relief in this case,” the joint status report stated.

Counsel for the state said that a December trial is needed to allow time to build the case and develop a “complete record that will facilitate the Court’s decision and subsequent review, if necessary, by the Supreme Court.”