Alabama GOP-backed voting map blocked by federal court ruling

Federal court blocks Alabama GOP voting map before midterms

Federal judges temporarily blocked Alabama’s plan to use a new congressional map that could help Republicans win an additional House seat. The three-judge panel issued a preliminary injunction halting the state’s efforts to alter congressional districts ahead of November’s midterm elections.

Alabama must continue using the court-mandated districts from the 2024 congressional elections. This ruling keeps the existing map with two districts where Black residents compose a majority or close to it.

A three-judge panel rules map intentionally discriminated based on race

The federal judges ruled that the Republican-backed plan intentionally discriminated based on race by including only one Black-majority district. They stated the district lines deliberately discriminated based on race, violating the Constitution.

Judges said they cannot envision requiring Alabamians to vote under a district scheme marred by intentional racial discrimination. The panel expressed strong concern about the racial bias in the proposed map.

GOP map would remove one of two majority-Black districts

The GOP-backed 2023 map would reduce Alabama from two majority-or-near-majority Black districts to one. That change could give Republicans a stronger chance to reclaim the south Alabama seat currently held by Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall filed emergency applications at the U.S. Supreme Court seeking permission to use the 2023 congressional plan in the 2026 elections. The state argued that the lower court’s injunction conflicted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais.

2024 court-ordered map elected two Black congress members for the first time

The court-selected map used in 2024 helped Alabama elect two Black U.S. House members to serve at the same time for the first time in state history. Terri Sewell continued representing the 7th District, while Shomari Figures won the redrawn 2nd District.

The map included two Black opportunity districts, giving Black voters a meaningful chance to elect candidates of their choice. The May 2026 preliminary injunction keeps that special-master plan in place for the 2026 elections while Alabama’s appeal continues.

Alabama asks the Supreme Court to allow GOP-friendly congressional map

Alabama officials asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause the lower court’s May 26 injunction and allow the state to use its GOP-backed 2023 congressional map. The emergency applications requested a ruling before June 1, 2026, along with an immediate administrative stay.

The state filed the applications one day after the three-judge court blocked use of the 2023 plan. That plan includes only one Black-majority district among Alabama’s seven congressional districts.

Ruling deals a temporary setback to Republicans’ redistricting efforts

A three-judge federal district court panel blocked Alabama’s GOP-friendly 2023 congressional map, creating a temporary setback for Republicans ahead of the 2026 House elections. The ruling required Alabama to continue using the court-selected special-master map unless the Supreme Court intervenes.

Republican officials moved to revive the 2023 map after the Supreme Court’s April 2026 decision in Louisiana v. Callais changed the legal landscape for race-conscious redistricting. The Alabama panel said the state’s 2023 plan still could not be used because it was tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.

Court reaffirms map violated the 14th Amendment and Voting Act

The panel reaffirmed that Alabama’s 2023 map was tainted by intentional race-based discrimination and could not be used for the 2026 elections. The finding centered on the court’s view that the plan intentionally diluted Black voters’ political power in violation of constitutional protections.

Earlier rulings in the same litigation also involved Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which bars voting practices that deny minority voters an equal opportunity to participate and elect preferred candidates. After Louisiana v. Callais, the Alabama panel said the intentional-discrimination finding remained a separate reason to block the 2023 plan.

Earlier in May, court allowed the state to proceed with the 2023 map temporarily

On May 11, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated prior judgments in Alabama’s redistricting cases and sent them back for reconsideration after Louisiana v. Callais. Alabama then moved to use its 2023 congressional plan during the ongoing 2026 election cycle.

Voting rights plaintiffs returned to the district court and sought preliminary relief to keep the special-master map in place. On May 26, the three-judge panel blocked Alabama from using the 2023 plan and ordered the state to administer the elections under the special-master map.

Panel ruled that Republicans still blocked from using the 2023 map

A three-judge panel in federal court ruled unanimously that state Republicans are still blocked from using their 2023 congressional map. This map would have potentially helped Republicans win in the November elections.

The unanimous decision shows strong judicial agreement about the racial discrimination problem, clearly demonstrated today. All three judges agreed that the map cannot go into effect before the November elections.

Fun fact: Every 10 years, after the census, states redraw the boundaries of congressional and state legislative districts to reflect population changes.

State could appeal ruling directly to U.S. Supreme Court

Alabama filed emergency stay applications at the U.S. Supreme Court on May 27, 2026, asking the justices to let the state use its 2023 congressional plan. The filings challenged the May 26 preliminary injunction issued by the federal three-judge panel.

The appeal followed the Supreme Court’s April 2026 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which struck down Louisiana’s second majority-Black congressional district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Alabama argued that Callais supports its position, while voting rights plaintiffs said the Alabama case still involves a separate finding of intentional discrimination.

Ruling poses challenge for Republican Party midterm election strategy

The ruling complicates Republican efforts to use Alabama’s 2023 congressional map in the 2026 House elections. GOP officials wanted the map because it could help them reclaim the seat now held by Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures.

For now, Alabama must use the court-selected special-master map unless the Supreme Court intervenes. That map includes two districts where Black residents are a majority or close to it, preserving a second Black opportunity district.

Alabama lawmakers could attempt to enact a new congressional district plan

The court noted Alabama lawmakers want to attempt to enact a new congressional district plan at this late hour, which they are free to do. However, timing makes this extremely difficult before November.

As of now, Alabama must move forward with the 2024 map unless lawmakers create something new quickly. Late-stage redistricting faces practical and legal hurdles.

Redistricting battles are intensifying across U.S. states, with a court fight now unfolding in Virginia after renewed political claims and disputes over the voting process.

This temporary injunction blocks map until Supreme Court makes final decision

The May 26 order is a preliminary injunction that blocks Alabama from using its 2023 congressional plan in the 2026 elections unless the Supreme Court intervenes. Alabama has asked the justices for emergency relief, but that request does not necessarily resolve the full merits of the case.

The outcome will determine whether Alabama uses the GOP-backed 2023 map or the court-selected special-master map for the 2026 elections. The case remains nationally significant because it sits at the center of post-Callais redistricting fights over race, representation, and House control.

The growing redistricting push across U.S. states is also sparking pushback in Tennessee, where demonstrators are opposing a proposed new map.

Do you believe the current redistricting push helps or hurts democracy? Share your thoughts.

This slideshow was made with AI assistance and human editing.

Read More From This Brand:

• Supreme Court Sides With Texas Republicans in Major Redistricting Fight
• Supreme Court of Virginia keeps voter-approved redistricting plan blocked for now
• Virginia’s redistricting debate intensifies as critics cite past comments from Barack Obama