Alabama Republicans have escalated their legal battle over congressional maps to the Supreme Court after a federal court blocked the state’s GOP-backed plan. The lower court ruled that the proposed map intentionally discriminated against Black voters, despite the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which limited the use of race in drawing political districts.
READ MORE: BREAKING NEWS !! Marco Rubio: China, U.S. Agree Hormuz Should Not Be ‘Militarized’
On Wednesday, Alabama officials filed an emergency appeal asking the nation’s highest court to allow the use of their preferred Republican map in the 2026 elections. The outcome is seen as potentially pivotal, as even a single seat shift in Alabama could influence control of the U.S. House. The state’s filing came a day after a three-judge federal panel ordered Alabama to continue using a court-drawn map that helped Democrats secure an additional congressional seat.
The case has become a key test of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, which prompted a wave of Republican-led map redraws across the South. Alabama Republicans argue that the ruling validates their effort to eliminate two majority-Black districts. However, the lower court maintained that the state’s proposed map still reflected unconstitutional racial discrimination.
In its decision, the federal panel wrote, “Ultimately, we cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.” The judges also noted that maintaining the existing court-approved map would not disrupt upcoming election schedules.
The three-judge panel included U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus, appointed by President Bill Clinton, and District Judges Anna Manasco and Terry Moorer, both appointed by former President Donald Trump. The ruling forces Alabama to continue using the 2024 court-drawn map, which created a second majority-Black district and led to Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures winning office.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall criticized the decision and promised to continue pursuing the case, calling it “a very fluid situation” and emphasizing that the fight is ongoing. The dispute highlights broader national debates over race, redistricting, and political power, particularly after federal courts previously required Alabama to create a second district that would give Black voters a fair chance to elect their preferred candidates.
With the case now headed back to the Supreme Court, justices may soon determine how far states can go in eliminating race-conscious districts following the Louisiana v. Callais ruling, potentially reshaping congressional redistricting rules nationwide.
Benjamin Harris is a RapidReports front page contributor and editor,proud father of four.
