The Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People that accused South Carolina of “racial gerrymandering” across its new Congressional map.
In a 6-3 decision split along conservative-liberal lines, the Court ruled that the challengers had not proven the state legislature’s actions were racially motivated when it relocated thousands of Black voters from the state’s 1st Congressional District.
Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito said that there was “no direct evidence” that race was an issue when the lines were drawn.
“No direct evidence supports the District Court’s finding that race predominated in the design of District 1,” Alito wrote. “The circumstantial evidence falls far short of showing that race, not partisan preferences, drove the districting process.”
BREAKING.
The U.S. Supreme Court *REVERSES* South Carolina’s rejection of “racially gerrymandered” districts in federal elections.
Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the court:
“These doctrinal lines collide when race and partisan preference are highly correlated. We… pic.twitter.com/w0JYDQvozJ
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) May 23, 2024
Justice Clarence Thomas also weighed in, writing that there was “no substance to the dissent’s attacks.”
The affected area in Charleston was previously a swing sweat, having changed parties in 2018 and 2020. It is currently held by Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace.
Writing in dissent for the liberal wing of the court, Justice Elena Kagan said that there was “more than enough evidence” racial gerrymandering had taken place.
“The Challengers introduced more than enough evidence of racial gerrymandering to support the District Court’s judgment,” she wrote. “The majority declares that it knows better than the District Court what happened in a South Carolina map-drawing room to produce District 1.
“But the proof is in the pudding: On page after page, the majority’s opinion betrays its distance from, and lack of familiarity with, the events and evidence central to this case.”
The ruling is an obvious victory for the GOP, which is likely to hold at least one Congressional seat as a result. However, litigation on a separate claim related to Voting Rights Acts will be returned to lower courts, placing the future of the Congressional map under continued doubt.
