Following the failure of the Supreme Court to intervene, a map that was deemed to be racially gerrymandered by two courts can now be utilized in a county in the state of Texas.
Even though opponents of the plan in Galveston County, which is administered by the Republican Party, were concerned that it was discriminatory against minority votes since it removed the one district that was dominated by people of African American and Latino descent, the court ruled that the map may be utilized.
In the month of October, a District Court issued a ruling that the redesigned map was not only illegal but also violated the Voting Rights Act. The court also ordered that a new map be put up. To begin, a panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals concurred, arguing that the map was racially gerrymandered in accordance with the precedent set by the Fifth Circuit.
A different map would have been adopted for the district if this ruling had been taken into consideration. After that, the Fifth Circuit decided to put its verdict on hold and is scheduled to review it the following year, which is two months after the primary election in Texas, which will take place in March of 2024.
The decision was made because of a disagreement that has been going on for a long time and involved the entire nation on voting maps and whether or not voting coalitions, which can refer to ethnic groupings, are protected by the Voting Rights Act.
There were three African-American residents of Galveston who petitioned the Supreme Court to step in, but the conservative majority opted against doing so. Justice Elena Kagan was one of the three liberals on the court who gave their dissenting opinion.
The decision to refrain from intervening is a significant victory for Republicans, and stories of a similar nature have been appearing all around the United States.
Steve Vladeck, an analyst for CNN’s Supreme Court and a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, stated to the news network that the case has “broader implications.”
“The [Fifth Circuit] court of appeals justified letting the unlawful map stay in place in a way that will make it much harder, going forward, for plaintiffs in Louisiana, Mississippi, or Texas to persuade any federal judge to block an unlawful map except in very short windows after elections take place,” explained the judge.
In the state of Florida, a congressional map was submitted that was accused of diminishing the influence of African-American suffragettes. With its assistance, the Republican Party was able to keep a small majority in the House of Representatives, which it continues to hold to this day.
During the month of September, the Leon County Circuit Judge J. Lee Marsh stated that a lawsuit against the map, which had been approved by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, was accurate. “The map results in the diminishment of Black voters’ ability to elect their candidate of choice in violation of the Florida constitution,” Judge Marsh stated in a ruling. “This is a violation of the Constitution of Florida.”
The decision was overturned by an appellate court, and it is anticipated that the matter will be brought before the Supreme Court of Florida.
