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.
And it is that, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, prohibits electoral practices that give rise to a denial or restriction of the right to vote on the basis of race.
During a press conference organized by Ethnic Media Services, the federal action was considered excellent news by defenders of the right to vote, being a great advance in the electoral rights of the most vulnerable communities.
On June 8, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Allen v. Milligan, which is related to redistricting under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ?VRA? , and in it that 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 equal distribution.
The plaintiffs alleged that the state's redistribution brought together many black voters in a single district in a part of central Alabama known as the "black belt," while at the same time dispersing other black voters in the rest of that area. area, but in various districts. ?Read more on the topic?
Given this, Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican-American Fund for Legal Defense and Education, explained that Section 2 is the main operative provision to enforce voting rights in the country.
“?Section 2? It is the main one on the issue of 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, in the same way, this section serves to challenge some of the barriers to access to the electoral ballot, such as the provision of voter identification or restrictions on the ability to vote.
«The decision was unexpected, it is a victory. The ability of people of African descent 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 had been in effect for a long time.», Saenz pointed out.
Undoubtedly, obtaining this result is very favorable, but there is also talk of what should continue to be done, not only to celebrate this won case, but to continue working on the rights of voters that guarantee greater citizen representation.
For Evan Milligan, the lead plaintiff in Allen v. Milligan and CEO of Alabama Forward, making his case and obtaining this favorable outcome represents an achievement for his family, for his community, and for all who are fighting for greater representation in his country.
Although the Supreme Court decision surprised Evan Milligan, he enthusiastically celebrated it, showing that change is possible and that fighting for these issues is necessary to benefit the entire black community. However, his fight does not stop.
«First, there's a long-term view about Alabama organizations and the voter rights building movement and how we can work more holistically, continue 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, since it allows progress in the right to vote for all and equally.
«We have felt relieved after what has happened. So much has been done to defend Section number 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 law. Finding something that was the opposite would have been such a radical move that I think no one should be expecting that.», he emphasized.
De León spoke of the indigenous communities that do not have a clear representation and explained that it has been possible to observe that the votes of the indigenous communities also want 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.
Also speaking on the subject was Stuart Naifeh, director of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. Redistricting Project, and explained the importance of Section 2 for voting rights in the country, by allowing the division of districts of 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 from 10 years ago of other acts of voting rights», he stressed.
Stuart Naifeh expressed his enthusiasm for obtaining this result and pointed out that it is a victory to be able to preserve Section 2, a case that impacts beyond Alabama and that 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, while pointing out that it is a great step to continue defending voting rights. However, they pointed out that it is not a joy at all, since it would have to be a right within the reach of all communities.
You may be interested in: Experts discuss fair redistricting in Alabama
