Experts and analysts called the US Supreme Court ruling a triumph, ruling that Alabama's new congressional redistricting map violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and dilutes the votes of black residents of the state, making Alabama a benchmark in voting rights for all communities in the country.
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits voting practices that result in a denial or restriction of the right to vote on the basis of race.
During a press conference organized by Ethnic Media ServicesThe federal action was hailed as excellent news by voting rights advocates, as it was a major step forward for the electoral rights of the most vulnerable communities.
On June 8, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the case Allen v. Milligan, which is related to the redistricting under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), and in which the plaintiffs demanded the annulment of Alabama's redistricting maps for discriminating against African-American voters, asking that Section 2 be considered in favor of a new, more equitable distribution.
The plaintiffs said the state's new apportionment packed many African-American voters into a single district in a part of central Alabama known as the "Black Belt," while simultaneously dispersing other African-American voters throughout the rest of the area in separate districts. —Read more about the topic—
In response, Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, explained that Section 2 is the primary operational provision for enforcing voting rights in the country.
"Section 2 is the main section on voting rights, which is why it has historically been used to challenge redistribution, but also to challenge electoral systems in general," he said.
He explained that this section also serves to challenge some of the barriers to accessing the ballot, such as the requirement for voter identification or restrictions on the ability to vote.
«The decision was unexpected, it's a victory. The ability of African-Americans to challenge the district maps that have been used across the country is a tremendous unexpected victory, because the danger was that the conservative majority was going to change a law that has been in effect for a long time.", Saenz pointed out.
Without a doubt, obtaining this result is very favorable, but it also speaks of what should continue to be done, not only to celebrate this case won, but to continue working on the rights of voters that guarantee greater citizen representation.
For Evan Milligan, the lead plaintiff in the Allen v. Milligan case and executive director of Alabama Forward, making his case and winning this favorable outcome represents an achievement for his family, his community, and everyone fighting for greater representation in their country.
Although Evan Milligan was surprised by the Supreme Court's decision, he celebrated it enthusiastically, proving that change is possible and that fighting for these issues is necessary to benefit the entire African-descendant community. However, his fight does not stop.
«First, there is a long-term view about Alabama organizations and the voter rights building movement and how we can work in a more comprehensive way, continuing to advance the issue, but also with our national and international partners.", he explained.
In the case of Jacqueline de León, a lawyer for the Native American Rights Fund, the achievement for Alabama is also an achievement for Latinos, as it allows for progress in voting rights for all and equally.
«We are relieved after what has happened. There has been a lot of fighting to defend Section Two and of course as many have said, in Alabama this was a basic factual application of the law, and the law clearly stated a violation of the law. To find anything to the contrary would have been a radical move that I don't think anyone should be expecting.", he emphasized.
De León spoke of indigenous communities that do not have clear representation and explained that it has been possible to observe that the votes of indigenous communities also wish to be diluted. For example, in different instances of racial discrimination in native communities such as South Dakota, North Dakota, and New Mexico, among some cases that already exist.
Stuart Naifeh, director of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.'s Redistricting Project, also spoke on the topic, explaining the importance of Section 2 for the rights of voters in the country, by allowing districts to be divided in a representative manner when casting their vote.
«We are happy with the result, but I find it sad that we are so happy to want to preserve the status quo, this also includes the decision 10 years ago of other voting rights acts", he stressed.
Stuart Naifeh was excited about the outcome and said it was a victory to be able to preserve Section 2, a case that has an impact beyond Alabama and shows all communities that changes can be made so that their vote is truly valued.
Finally, the experts agreed that what happened in Alabama is a great victory, and that it is a great step towards continuing to defend voting rights. However, they pointed out that it is not entirely a joy, since it should be a right available to all communities.
You may be interested in: Experts discuss fair redistricting in Alabama
