Court rules Alabama congressional map intentionally discriminated against Black voters
A three-judge panel said the congressional map drawn by the 2023 Alabama legislature violated the Voting Rights Act. The judges, which ruled against the state twice before and put a new map in place for last year's elections, have permanently blocked Alabama from using the state-drawn map.
The judges said the court does not 'diminish the substantial improvements Alabama has made in its official treatment of Black Alabamians in recent decades.
'Yet we cannot reconcile the State's intentional decision to discriminate in drawing its congressional districts with its position that Alabama has finally closed out its repugnant history of official discrimination involving voting rights,' they added.
The court will now consider whether to place Alabama under Provision 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which would require the state to get federal approval of its congressional plans.
Following the 2020 census, Alabama made six of its seven districts majority white, despite 27 percent of the state's population is Black.
Though the Supreme Court allowed the map to be used in the 2022 midterms, it also upheld the lower courts findings that the map unlawfully diluted Black votes.
Despite the rulings, the state legislature refused to redraw the map to include a second congressional district that would allow Black voters to elect the candidate of their choice.
'This record thus leaves us in no doubt that the purpose of the design of the 2023 Plan was to crack Black voters across congressional districts in a manner that makes it impossible to create two districts in which they have an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, and thereby intentionally perpetuate the discriminatory effects of the 2021 Plan,' the judges said Thursday.
'The Legislature knew what federal law required and purposefully refused to provide it, in a strategic attempt to checkmate the injunction that ordered it,' they wrote.
Plaintiffs in the case told the Associated Press the ruling is 'a testament to the dedication and persistence of many generations of Black Alabamians who pursued political equality at great cost.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats need to start using AI to help save democracy
As American democracy unravels at the hands of President Trump and his enabling congressional and Supreme Court majorities, millions of Americans are desperate to identify whatever possible countermeasures remain to slow the country's descent into fascism. The outcome of the 2026 midterms is unlikely to produce meaningful change, even if the Democrats take control of the House. Without a cooperative Senate, it will be impossible either to pass legislation or secure a conviction on impeachment charges. Oversight hearings can bring public attention to things like rampant corruption, but the threats Trump poses to the rule of law and democracy are already well-known. The courts can only do so much. There's another emerging tool, however: artificial intelligence. Trump seems to understands the transformative power of AI. Last month, the administration announced an ' AI Action Plan ' for 'winning the AI race.' Among other measures, it promises to remove 'onerous Federal regulations that hinder AI development and deployment, and seek private sector input on rules to remove.' As part of this initiative, the General Services Administration and OpenAI announced earlier this month that the company will be 'providing ChatGPT to the entire U.S. federal workforce' under a 'first-of-its-kind partnership.' Participating agencies will pay a nominal cost of $1 each for the first year to enable federal employees to 'explore and leverage AI.' The company is also 'teaming up with experienced partners Slalom and Boston Consulting Group to support secure, responsible deployment and trainings.' Last week, the AI company Anthropic likewise announced it had struck the same deal with GSA to enable federal agencies' access to its Claude model. The Trump administration's effort to streamline the federal government with AI models makes some sense. Research has shown that generative AI — particularly large language models, which consume vast amounts of data to understand and generate natural language content — can enhance government efficiency in data processing, analysis and drafting, among other potential advantages. But AI systems also increase the risk of widespread government surveillance, personalized misinformation and disinformation, systematic discrimination, lack of accountability and inaccuracy. According to a recent academic paper, 'although many studies have explored the ethical implications of AI, fewer have fully examined its democratic implications.' Trump's alliance with OpenAI head Sam Altman goes back to start of his second term, when he announced a $500 billion joint venture with OpenAI, Oracle and Softbank to build up to 20 large AI data centers. Trump called the venture 'Stargate.' The deal's details are murky, including who will have access to Stargate and how it will possibly benefit taxpayers. Although a spokesman for OpenAI told Fox News Digital that 'Sam Altman sort of planted a flag on democratic AI versus autocratic AI,' let's not forget that Altman is not a government official or employee. As a legal matter, it is unclear whether these ' fast-tracked ' deals will fully comply with traditional oversight and procurement laws and procedures. No major AI company is currently approved under the Federal Risk And Authorization Management Program, for example, which is the process for authorizing the use of cloud technologies by federal agencies. According the GSA website, the program aims to ensure 'security and protection of federal information' by imposing strict cybersecurity controls to protect against data breaches, hacking and unauthorized access, and requiring ongoing monitoring and reporting. Given that the GSA is reportedly working on 'developing a separate authorization' for generative AI systems like ChatGPT and Claude, the potential threats to national security and private citizens' personal information are significant. The Trump administration's lack of transparency also risks creating a black-box government run by proprietary algorithms that the public cannot inspect — centralizing control over federal AI in two companies whose interests clearly lie in market dominance, not the public good. This is why these kinds of decisions are best made through established legal procedures — including the Federal Competition in Contracting Act (requiring fair and open competition), the Privacy Act of 1974 (limiting how agencies can collect and disclose personal data), the Federal Records Act (requiring the proper retention and archiving of public records) and the Administrative Procedure Act (requiring public comment and input into major policy decisions). For now, OpenAI has promised that its 'goal is to ensure agencies can use AI securely and responsibly. ChatGPT Enterprise already does not use business data, including inputs or outputs, to train or improve OpenAI models. The same safeguards will apply to federal use.' This promise from Altman's company is no substitute for actual legal standards enforced by the federal government. Whether AI tools embedded in federal government systems could one day be used to sway elections to favor Trump and his cronies is a vital question. For now, what's clear is that Democrats need to get into the AI game, and fast. A Democratic political action committee called the National Democratic Training Committee recently unveiled on online course entitled 'AI For Progressive Campaigns,' which is designed to teach candidates how to use AI to help create social media content, draft speeches, craft voter outreach messaging and phone-banking scripts, conduct research into their constituencies and opponents, and develop internal training materials. The founder and CEO of the group, Kelly Dietrich, stated that 'thousands of Democratic campaigns can now leverage AI to compete at any scale.' This effort, although laudable, does not go far enough to capitalize on AI's potential to help outmaneuver authoritarianism in the U.S. There's much more that might be done, including using AI to educate citizens on the benefits of democracy, how institutions work and the facts underlying important issues; to create large-scale, moderated public deliberation and consensus around divisive issues; to detect and alert the public to manipulated media, thus combatting misinformation and disinformation and fostering public trust in an alternative to Trump; and to create and implement effective messaging strategies for alternative visions for the future of the country. AI could be American voters' best friend, not their enemy. It just needs to be asked.
San Francisco Chronicle
20 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Texas Democrat spends night in Legislature protesting police shadowing in redistricting battle
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Democratic Texas lawmaker opted to spend the night in the state House chamber and remain there Tuesday rather than allow a law enforcement officer to shadow her while Republicans try to prevent further delays to redrawing U.S. House maps. Rep. Nicole Collier overnight stay stemmed from Republicans in the Texas House requiring returning Democrats to sign what the Democrats called 'permission slips,' agreeing to around-the-clock surveillance by state Department of Public Safety officers to leave the floor. Collier, of Fort Worth, refused and remained on the House floor Monday night. The Democrats' return to Texas puts the Republican-run Legislature in position to satisfy Trump's demands, possibly later this week, as California Democrats advance new congressional boundaries in retaliation. Lawmakers had officers posted outside their Capitol offices, and suburban Dallas Rep. Mihaela Plesa said one tailed her on her Monday evening drive back to her apartment in Austin after spending much of the day on a couch in her office. She said he went with her for a staff lunch and even down the hallway with her for restroom breaks. 'We were kind of laughing about it, to be honest, but this is really serious stuff," Plesa said in a telephone interview. "This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and really performative theater.' Collier, who represents a minority-majority district, said she would not 'sign away my dignity" and allow Republicans to 'control my movements and monitor me.' 'I know these maps will harm my constituents,' she said in a statement. "I won't just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination.' 2 states at the center of an expanding fight The tit-for-tat puts the nation's two most populous states at the center of an expanding fight over control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The battle has rallied Democrats nationally following infighting and frustrations among the party's voters since Republicans took total control of the federal government in January. Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers left for Illinois and elsewhere on Aug. 3, denying their Republican colleagues the attendance necessary to vote on redrawn maps intended to send five more Texas Republicans to Washington. Republicans now hold 25 of Texas' 38 U.S. House seats. They declared victory Friday, pointing to California's proposal intended to increase Democrats' U.S. House advantage by five seats. Many absent Democrats left Chicago early Monday and landed hours later at a private airfield in Austin, where several boarded a charter bus to the Capitol. Cheering supporters greeted them inside. Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows did not mention redistricting on the floor but promised swift action on the Legislature's agenda. 'We aren't playing around,' Republican state Rep. Matt Shaheen, whose district includes part of the Dallas area, said in a post on the X social media platform. Democrats promise to keep fighting Even as they declared victory, Democrats acknowledged Republicans can now approve redrawn districts. Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu said Democrats would challenge the new designs in court. Lawmakers did not take up any bills Monday and were not scheduled to return until Wednesday. Trump has pressured other Republican-run states to consider redistricting, as well, while Democratic governors in multiple statehouses have indicated they would follow California's lead in response. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said his state will hold a Nov. 4 special referendum on the redrawn districts. The president wants to shore up Republicans' narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of the midterms during his first presidency. After gaining House control in 2018, Democrats used their majority to stymie his agenda and twice impeach him. Nationally, the partisan makeup of existing district lines puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Of the 435 total House seats, only several dozen districts are competitive. So even slight changes in a few states could affect which party wins control. Redistricting typically occurs once at the beginning of each decade after the census. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among those that empower independent commissions, giving Newsom an additional hurdle. California Democrats start redrawing process Democratic legislators introduced new California maps Monday. It was the first official move toward the fall referendum asking voters to override the independent commission's work after the 2020 census. The proposed boundaries would replace current ones through 2030. Democrats said they will return the mapmaking power to the commission after that. State Republicans promised lawsuits. Democrats hold 43 out of California's 52 U.S. House seats. The proposal would try to expand that advantage by targeting battleground districts in Northern California, San Diego and Orange counties, and the Central Valley. Some Democratic incumbents also get more left-leaning voters in their districts. 'We don't want this fight, but with our democracy on the line, we cannot run away from this fight,' said Democrat Marc Berman, a California Assembly member who previously chaired the elections committee. Republicans expressed opposition in terms that echoed Democrats in Austin, accusing the majority of abusing power. Sacramento Republicans said they will introduce legislation advocating independent redistricting commissions in all states. Texas' governor jumped to the president's aid Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott launched the expanding battle when he heeded Trump's wishes and added redistricting to an initial special session agenda that included multiple issues, including a package responding to devastating floods that killed more than 130 people last month. Abbott has blamed Democrats' absence for delaying action on those measures. Democrats have answered that Abbott is responsible because he effectively linked the hyper-partisan matter to nonpartisan flood relief. Abbott, Burrows and other Republicans tried various threats and legal maneuvers to pressure Democrats' return, including the governor arguing that Texas judges should remove absent lawmakers from office. As long as they were out of state, lawmakers were beyond the reach of the civil arrest warrants that Burrows issued. The Democrats who returned Monday did so without being detained by law enforcement. The lawmakers who left face fines of up to $500 for each legislative day they missed. Burrows has insisted Democratic lawmakers also will pay pick up the tab for law enforcement who attempted to corral them during the walkout.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Chicago residents call Obama Presidential Center a 'monstrosity,' fear they'll be displaced: report
Chicago community leaders and longtime residents say the Obama Presidential Center risks washing away the neighborhood's fabric, warning that proposed luxury developments tied to the project could price out families who have long called the South Side home, according to a report. They also say the sprawling 19.3-acre site in historic Jackson Park, with its 225-foot-tall concrete museum, has become an eyesore that disrupts the natural landscape and all locals are getting in return for the unsightly structure is soaring rents and higher tax bills. "This is a monument to one man's ego," Steve Cortes, a longtime Chicagoan and former adviser to President Trump, told the Daily Mail. "Look at the Reagan Library. It's beautiful. This? There are almost no windows. What are they hiding? And this Brutalist cement look in a city known for its incredible architecture." The Obama Foundation secured a 99-year lease for the public parcel for $10 in 2018 and promised to revitalize the area. Obama said at the time that the project did not intend to displace residents, adding that its overseers are trying to balance boosting jobs and economic development in the area while maintaining and protecting existing affordable housing. Alderwoman Jeanette Taylor, who represents much of the working-class neighborhood surrounding the site, fears that locals are being priced out. "Every time large development comes to communities, they displace the very people they say they want to improve it for. This was no different, and we're living what is actually happening," Taylor told the outlet. "We're going to see rents go higher and we're going to see families displaced." She has pushed for protections such as affordable housing requirements around the site, tenant purchase rights and rental assistance to shield residents from displacement. She won some concessions in the 2020 agreement – whereby 30% of new units on city-owned land were to be affordable -- but many of her broader demands, including a full Community Benefits Agreement (CBA), were not adopted. A CBA is a binding deal that requires developers to deliver protections such as affordable housing, local hiring, or other safeguards to ensure big projects don't push out existing residents. "The city of Chicago should have done a Community Benefits Agreement before the first shovel went into the ground, but they didn't," Taylor said. "We're going to see small landlords having to raise the rent. Their property taxes are going up and we're going to see development that is not inclusive to our community." Residents point to a proposed 250-room luxury hotel as a symbol and a driver of economic pressures far beyond the scale of existing neighborhood development. Once a major luxury project is approved, surrounding property values typically spike and so its presence signals to investors and developers that the area is shifting toward wealthier clientele and away from its historically working-class, majority-Black base. The hotel's approval is still under review, and residents have held demonstrations calling for its rejection. The investment firm behind the project is headed by Allison Davis, a veteran real estate developer and lawyer who was Obama's first boss out of Harvard Law School. "When you got people's rent going from $850 to $1,300 you're telling people you don't want them in the neighborhood," said Dixon Romeo, an organizer with the Obama Community Benefits Agreement Coalition, told NBC Chicago at a demonstration in April. Since ground was broken, construction has progressed at a snail's pace while costs have ballooned from an original estimate of $330 million to a 2021 foundation projection of $830 million -- with no updates since then. The center, which aims to honor former President Barack Obama's political career, will also consist of a digital library, conference facilities, a gymnasium, and a regulation-sized NBA court. It will also house the nonprofit Obama Foundation, which is overseeing the center's development. The scale of the project and the aesthetics of its centerpiece library have come in for criticism. Ken Woodard, an attorney and father of six who grew up in the area, called it a "monstrosity." "It looks like this big piece of rock that just landed here out of nowhere in what used to be a really nice landscape of trees and flowers," Woodward told the Daily Mail. "It's over budget, it's taking way too long to finish and it's going to drive up prices and bring headaches and problems for everyone who lives here. It feels like a washing away of the neighborhood and culture that used to be here." Kyana Butler, an activist with Southside Together who campaigned for a CBA around the Obama Center, shared similar sentiments with the outlet. "It's pretty huge and monstrous," Butler said. "It could have been smaller in scale and cost a lot less money. We're all worried about the impact on the community." Tyrone Muhammad, director of Ex-Cons for Community and Social Change, said, "It's truly the Tower of Babel." "Property taxes are going up so much that the owner of my building is saying she might just walk away.. I don't blame President Obama for all of this, but the people on his team may not have the best intentions for people in this area," Muhammed, 2026 Illinois Senate candidate, told the outlet. "It's disingenuous and hypocritical to take park space away from people and then not involve them in what takes its place. The move violates common decency." Fox News Digital has reached out to the Obama Center for comment. In May, President Donald Trump offered to help out with the development of the center and linked DEI to the construction problems. The project set out "ambitious goals" for certain construction diversity quotas, with its contracts to be allocated to "diverse suppliers," 35% of which were required to be minority-based enterprises (MBEs). "Look, President Obama, if he wanted help, I'd give him help because I'm a really good builder and I build on time, on budget. He's building his library in Chicago. It's a disaster," Trump said, adding that Obama was paying for prioritizing DEI over meritocracy. "And he wanted to be very politically correct and he didn't use good, hard, tough, mean construction workers that I love Marco," Trump said, while addressing Secretary of State Marco Rubio. A $40.75 million racially charged lawsuit filed earlier this year by a minority contractor against the project's structural engineer shined a spotlight on the DEI-driven aspect of the project. The structural engineers claimed the minority contractor lacked sufficient qualifications and experience to perform its work, resulting in delays.
