Fact Check: Alabama Officials Challenge Race-Based Redistricting in Supreme Court Again
What We Know
Alabama officials, led by Attorney General Steve Marshall, are indeed challenging race-based redistricting decisions in the U.S. Supreme Court. Following a ruling in the case of Allen v. Milligan, the Supreme Court denied Alabama's request for a stay, which would have allowed the state to use its original congressional map for the upcoming elections. Instead, the court mandated the use of a court-drawn map that aims to rectify racial discrimination against Black voters, as the previous map was found to intentionally dilute their voting strength, violating the Voting Rights Act (Marshall, 2023; NPR, 2025).
In the Allen v. Milligan case, a panel of federal judges ruled that Alabama's congressional district map was unconstitutional and discriminatory, prompting the need for a new map that would provide fair representation for Black voters (NPR, 2025). The ruling highlighted Alabama's historical defiance of federal court orders regarding voting rights and emphasized the necessity of compliance with the Voting Rights Act (NPR, 2025).
Analysis
The claim that Alabama officials are challenging race-based redistricting in the Supreme Court is substantiated by recent developments in the Allen v. Milligan case. Attorney General Marshall's statements reflect the state's ongoing legal battles against the court's decisions, which he describes as prioritizing race over fair representation (Marshall, 2023). This perspective, however, is contested by the federal court's findings that assert the necessity of race-conscious redistricting to ensure equitable representation for Black voters in Alabama, who make up approximately 25% of the state's population (NPR, 2025).
The reliability of the sources is critical in assessing the validity of the claim. The statements from Attorney General Marshall originate from an official press release, which, while authoritative, may carry a bias reflecting the state's political stance (Marshall, 2023). Conversely, the NPR report provides a detailed account of the court's ruling and the implications for Alabama's electoral landscape, making it a credible source for understanding the legal context and the challenges faced by the state (NPR, 2025).
Conclusion
The claim that Alabama officials are challenging race-based redistricting in the Supreme Court is True. The ongoing litigation surrounding the Allen v. Milligan case confirms that Alabama's Attorney General is actively pursuing legal avenues to contest the court's ruling on redistricting, which has significant implications for the representation of Black voters in the state.
