Alabama passes backup plan for new House primaries if courts approve new districts
Alabama lawmakers passed legislation Friday that would create a new primary election for some U.S. House seats if courts allow Republican-drawn district lines to be used for the November midterm elections. The bill was signed quickly into law by Republican Gov. Kay Ivey, setting up another set of court fights over whether newly drawn districts can be put into effect on a tight timeline.
The Alabama action reflects Republicans’ broader push across several Southern states to capitalize on a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that weakened Voting Rights Act protections for minorities. Republicans have argued that recent litigation shifts make it more feasible to revise district maps for upcoming elections, while Democrats contend the changes would undercut minority voting power.
The package passed in Alabama also came amid visible political pressure at the Statehouse. Protesters outside the building shouted “fight for democracy” and “down with white supremacy,” and inside the House gallery, one protester was dragged out by security officers during the chaotic scene that followed.
Democratic lawmakers argued the new legislation echoes the state’s Jim Crow history. Democratic state Sen. Rodger Smitherman said after the vote that “What happened here today is that we were set back as a people to the days of Reconstruction.” Senate Democrats shouted “hell no” and “stop the steal” as senators voted.
As covered in Virginia and other states’ court disputes, the legal posture around redistricting often turns on the procedural steps taken before election day. The Alabama bill is designed as a fallback: lawmakers said the new primary would ignore some May 19 primary results for some congressional seats and direct the governor to schedule a new primary under revised districts only if a court allows it.
How Alabama’s special primary would work, and what courts still need to do
The Alabama special primary is contingent on a court decision to lift an injunction that put a court-selected map in place until after the 2030 census. The order required a second district where Black voters are the majority or close to it, a requirement that contributed to the 2024 election of Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures, who is Black.
If the injunction is lifted, Republican officials said they want to switch to a map lawmakers drew in 2023. That 2023 map had been rejected by a federal court, a history that Democrats warned would return if courts allow the state to move forward with the new approach.
On Friday evening, however, a three-judge panel rejected Alabama’s request to lift the injunction and pave the way for changing the maps. The request remained pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, leaving Alabama’s primary timetable dependent on whether the higher court intervenes.
Ivey, in a statement after the special session, said, “With this special session successfully behind us, Alabama now stands ready to quickly act, should the courts issue favorable rulings in our ongoing redistricting cases.”
Alabama’s move follows Virginia ruling that derailed a Democratic map on ballot timing
The Alabama vote came just a day after Tennessee enacted new congressional districts that carve up a Democratic-held, Black-majority district in Memphis, according to the report. The Tennessee Democratic Party sued on Friday seeking to prevent the districts from being used until after this year’s elections because of the time frame.
Even before those legal fights, Democrats and Republicans had been locked in a high-stakes redistricting battle for seats in the U.S. House that could decide control in the closely divided chamber. The fight tilted further toward Republicans Friday after Virginia’s Supreme Court invalidated a Democratic redistricting effort.
Virginia’s court said Democratic lawmakers violated constitutional requirements when placing a redistricting amendment on the ballot. The ruling centered on timing: the Virginia Constitution requires lawmakers to approve a constitutional amendment in two separate sessions separated by an election. The report said lawmakers’ first approval occurred last October while early voting was underway but before it concluded for the general election, and their second vote occurred after a new legislative session began in January.
The Virginia Supreme Court said the initial legislative approval came too late and noted that more than 1.3 million ballots had already been cast, about 40% of the total votes ultimately cast.
Other Southern states weigh congressional map changes amid similar backlash
In Louisiana, a Senate committee considered multiple redistricting options Friday that would reduce Black-majority U.S. House districts, including proposals discussed from Republican state Sen. John “Jay” Morris. Democratic state Sen. Sam Jenkins told Morris that “Every one of these maps reduces Black voting power in every one of the districts. And I think that’s a problem.”
Morris denied the proposals were discriminatory and said his goal was to be “respectful of the traditional boundaries” of Louisiana’s six congressional districts. He also said, “I don’t think we should care that much about race.”
The Louisiana hearing drew testimony from members of the Black community as well. Leona Tate, whose account described being escorted through a racist white mob when she was 6 during school desegregation efforts in New Orleans, told lawmakers that she felt reducing Black political power amounted to stepping backward. She said lawmakers had “a choice in front of you: You can draw a map that reflects what Louisiana actually is — a state where Black voices belong in the halls of Congress,” or “draw a map that tells my grandchildren that their votes don’t count, that their faces don’t matter and that the progress I helped build with my own two feet as a 6-year-old can be erased at will.”
In South Carolina, lawmakers held a rare Friday meeting to discuss a proposed new congressional map aimed at giving Republicans a clean sweep of the state’s seven U.S. House seats. The report said that while the House hearing was the first step, the Senate had yet to agree to consider new districts later this month, a move requiring a two-thirds vote.
At the subcommittee meeting, lawmakers heard hours of testimony, almost all against the map. The report said a consultant testified that the proposed map appeared legal under the Supreme Court’s decision in the Louisiana case. Democratic state Rep. Justin Bamberg said, “I agree if the law allows us to do it, then we can do It,” and added, “But I can slap somebody’s mama and it’s not the right thing to do.”
The report also said some absentee ballots had already been returned for South Carolina’s June 9 primary elections, and the legislative subcommittee advanced a plan to delay the congressional primary to August and reopen a candidate filing period if a new map is approved.