Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a claim brought under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 against the congressional redistricting plan of Alabama, thus securing a significant victory for minority voting rights. The ruling was met with surprise by public opinion, as in the last few years the United States have witnessed a progressive weakening of voting rights, often to the detriment of communities of color. This paper aims to provide an analysis of the Supreme Court's decision in Allen v. Milligan and its follow-up, considering the contextual and legal background in which the current redistricting litigation takes place. Indeed, the 2020 census occurred in a political climate characterized by undue meddling from the Trump administration, and by the targeting of irregular immigrants, which resulted in a higher undercount of historically undercounted groups. Furthermore, for the first time in nearly sixty years, voters had to deal with a redistricting cycle shaped by the consequences of controversial rulings such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee. Although in Allen v. Milligan the Supreme Court ultimately allowed for the drawing of a second majority-Black district, it is still too early to assess whether the Court’s commitment to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act will last in the future.
Towards 2024 Elections: Racial Gerrymandering in the Latest U.S. Supreme Court's Rulings
Rachele Bizzari
2024-01-01
Abstract
Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a claim brought under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 against the congressional redistricting plan of Alabama, thus securing a significant victory for minority voting rights. The ruling was met with surprise by public opinion, as in the last few years the United States have witnessed a progressive weakening of voting rights, often to the detriment of communities of color. This paper aims to provide an analysis of the Supreme Court's decision in Allen v. Milligan and its follow-up, considering the contextual and legal background in which the current redistricting litigation takes place. Indeed, the 2020 census occurred in a political climate characterized by undue meddling from the Trump administration, and by the targeting of irregular immigrants, which resulted in a higher undercount of historically undercounted groups. Furthermore, for the first time in nearly sixty years, voters had to deal with a redistricting cycle shaped by the consequences of controversial rulings such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee. Although in Allen v. Milligan the Supreme Court ultimately allowed for the drawing of a second majority-Black district, it is still too early to assess whether the Court’s commitment to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act will last in the future.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
