Drawing congressional maps based on race is itself racist

OPINION:

The decision of a three-judge panel in the Northern District of Alabama threatens to permanently divide the country by race and politics. This is antithetical to the purposes of the Voting Rights Act — legislation whose purpose was to stop the division and sorting of the country based on race.

The panel not only threw out the congressional district map but declared that a new map must be drawn that includes two majority-Black districts. This requirement presupposes that Black Alabama citizens can only be legitimately represented by a Black representative and that a district that is 50.07% Black will elect a Black candidate.

That presupposition is itself a demonstration of a racial bias that frankly is not supported by the facts. Recent elections in Alabama and other states indicate the lack of racial bias that now exists as a growing number of minorities are being elected at every level of government, even candidates that do not run in majority-minority districts. In the recent Virginia elections, a white man was elected governor, a Black woman was elected lieutenant governor, and a Hispanic man was elected attorney general. More than half of the Congressional Black Caucus no longer represents Black-majority districts.

In a recent special election for the Alabama State House of Representatives, a Black man was elected as a Republican in a predominantly white district. Similarly, a Black Republican recently beat an incumbent white Democrat in Virginia’s predominantly white 91st House of Delegates district. The presupposition of a racial bias is not only unwarranted, it is in and of itself racially biased.

Moreover, the district court’s ruling contradicts the Supreme Court’s Shelby County v. Holder decision, which struck down the preclearance requirement imposed by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that while the requirements imposed by federal law in the 1960s were a necessary deterrent to combat the racial discrimination of that time, conditions have changed. Voter registration and voter turnout among Blacks have reached parity with whites. In the 2012 election, Blacks voted at a higher rate than whites in Alabama and other states previously subject to preclearance.

Not only does the command by the federal district court presupposes an atmosphere of racial discrimination that is unwarranted by the facts on the ground, but the decision also interferes with the right of Alabama’s state legislature to draw congressional district lines. One plaintiff was asked to describe acceptable representation during the hearings before the three-judge panel. The plaintiff’s response was a representative that would support the Biden administration’s policies, demonstrating a clear political bias.

In 2019, in Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts, thereby affirming that the authority for drawing congressional districts resides with state legislatures. In rejecting the congressional district map approved by the Alabama state legislature, the three-judge panel disregarded Supreme Court precedent.

At a time when the nation desperately needs to come together across all racial lines, drawing districts in such a way as to racially separate us is a bad idea. Over the last 15 years, federal courts have struck down districts in multiple states when they found race “predominated” in drawing maps. Now, this court in Alabama has ordered that race must predominate over nearly any other factor. It is hard to square this new decision with Supreme Court precedent.

We believe in representative government for all people regardless of race or gender, or religion, and we make every effort to be attentive to the needs of all of our constituents. Consequently, we believe the federal judges in the Northern District of Alabama erred in their judgment and overstepped their authority.

We hope that the Supreme Court will overturn the district court’s decision and uphold the constitutional authority of state legislatures. It is also our hope that Alabama and other states will continue to work toward a day when we can achieve Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of honestly judging people by their character and never again by the color of their skin, including the people we elect to represent us.

• Gary Palmer, Mike Rogers, Robert Aderholt, Barry Moore and Jerry Carl are in the U.S. House of Representatives, representing their districts in Alabama.