{"id":70235,"date":"2026-06-03T12:02:34","date_gmt":"2026-06-03T16:02:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/?post_type=alerts&#038;p=70235"},"modified":"2026-06-03T12:14:12","modified_gmt":"2026-06-03T16:14:12","slug":"supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance","status":"publish","type":"alerts","link":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court&#8217;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The unsigned emergency order in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/28183713-25a1314-order\/\" target=\"_blank\">Allen v. Milligan<\/a> goes beyond the court\u2019s recent <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/scotus-smothers-voting-rights-act-greenlighting-racial-discrimination-and-a-rash-of-gop-gerrymanders\/\" target=\"_blank\">Louisiana v. Callais<\/a> decision, which merely nullified the Voting Rights Act\u2019s (VRA) prohibition on unintentional racial discrimination, to also make it all but impossible for judges to strike down a map as intentionally discriminatory.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It does so by essentially flipping its own 2023 ruling in the same case.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor excoriated that decision to go down the \u201cpath\u201d that \u201cdisregards both democratic values and the rule of law, leading to \u201ca chaotic election, held under a never-before-used congressional map that intentionally discriminates against Black Alabamians, that Alabama adopted in unashamed defiance of a prior court order directly affirmed by this Court, and that will require officials to change the voter registrations of hundreds of thousands of voters in just days at best, a task that Alabama previously represented would take months.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sotomayor noted that Tuesday\u2019s decision was the third time Alabama\u2019s congressional map had found its way before the high bench, lamenting that \u201c[e]ach turn reveals just how unconscionable the Court\u2019s action is today.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It was the Supreme Court\u2019s surprising decision to uphold Section 2 of the VRA in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/u-s-supreme-court-strikes-down-alabama-congressional-map-upholds-voting-rights-act\/\" target=\"_blank\">Milligan<\/a> just three years ago that gave civil rights groups and voting advocates some glimmer of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/scotus-seems-ready-to-scrap-fair-elections-greenlight-racial-discrimination-and-hand-house-control-to-gop\/\" target=\"_blank\">hope<\/a> that it might truly preserve the law again in Callais.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"sign-up\n\t\">\n\t<div class=\"sign-up__inner\">\n\t\t<div class=\"sign-up__header\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span class=\"sign-up__eyebrow text--h6\">\n\t\t\t\t\tSIGN UP TODAY\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<h2 class=\"sign-up__title text--h1\">\n\t\t\t\t\tGet updates straight to your inbox \u2014 for free\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"sign-up__desc\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<p>Join 350,000 readers who rely on our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest in voting, elections and democracy.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<div class=\"sign-up__form\">\n\t\t\t<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/\/js.hsforms.net\/forms\/embed\/v2.js\"><\/script><script>hbspt.forms.create({ region: \"na1\", portalId: \"48216804\", formId: \"edec34b6-42b8-45e1-81d7-ef15f8bdee00\" });<\/script>\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Immediately after Callais came out in late April, Alabama asked the Supreme Court to vacate the lower court\u2019s injunction blocking it from using the congressional map it enacted in 2023 \u2014 the map the Supreme Court ultimately rejected in Milligan as VRA violation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The court granted that wish and remanded the case down to the district court, which then entered another <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/court-blocks-alabama-racial-gerrymander-from-being-used-in-2026-elections\/\" target=\"_blank\">injunction<\/a>, saying the map was \u201ctainted by intentional race-based discrimination.\u201d&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But on Tuesday, the Supreme Court vacated again, saying the lower court failed to \u201cheed the presumption of legislative good faith\u2026 because it interpreted the State\u2019s legal disagreement with the court\u2019s earlier remedial order as proof of discriminatory animus.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court explained that the plaintiffs failed to show that their alternative map performed \u201c\u2018just as well\u2019 with respect to all of the State\u2019s constitutionally permissible redistricting criteria,\u201d as required by Callais.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cYet, the District Court found a violation even though the plaintiffs\u2019 alternative map would not perform just as well as to the State\u2019s constitutionally permissible criteria of keeping together the Gulf Coast community of interest and avoiding the pairing of incumbents,\u201d the majority held.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But, as the Guardian\u2019s Sam Levine <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/srl\/status\/2061992317246988635\/photo\/1\" target=\"_blank\">noted<\/a> on social media Tuesday night, the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/22pdf\/21-1086_1co6.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">court<\/a> came to the exact opposite conclusion in the very same dispute just three years ago. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cAlabama argues that the Gulf Coast region in the southwest of the State is such a community of interest, and that plaintiffs\u2019 maps erred by separating it into two different districts,\u201d Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority in 2023. \u201cWe do not find the State\u2019s argument persuasive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>That inconsistency belies Justice Samuel Alito\u2019s claim in Callais that the Court was not striking down Section 2 of the VRA, but instead merely \u201cproperly constru[ing]\u201d it, as UCLA Law professor Rick Hasen noted.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201c[T]here\u2019s now practically an unrebuttable presumption that a legislature is acting in good faith and therefore is not acting in a racially discriminatory way so long as the state can assert some pretextual nonracial reason for enacting its plan,\u201d Hasen wrote after the decision\u2019s publication. \u201cSo in these cases, plaintiffs will need to meet an impossible standard to prove effect, just as in a post-Callais Section 2 case, a standard which simply ignores the fact that when (white) Republicans discriminate against Democrats in the south, they are discriminating against Black voters.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cMore and more, this Court shows itself to be little more than a partisan tool engaged in results-oriented jurisprudence, despite <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cnn.com\/2021\/09\/13\/politics\/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-not-partisan\" target=\"_blank\">protestations <\/a>to the <a href=\"https:\/\/slate.com\/news-and-politics\/2026\/05\/supreme-court-analysis-john-roberts-age-radical-change.html\" target=\"_blank\">contrary<\/a>,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sotomayor\u2019s dissent, which the court\u2019s other two Democratic appointees joined, highlighted the majority\u2019s hypocrisy and the chaos it unleashed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cNow the Court is squarely faced with a record of the turmoil it has caused and the harm it has wrought,\u201d Sotomayor wrote. \u201cYet just as Alabama doubled down on racial discrimination, the Court today doubles down on chaos.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/scotus-allows-texas-to-use-racially-gerrymandered-map-in-2026-midterm-elections\/\" target=\"_blank\">December<\/a>, the Supreme Court set aside a district court\u2019s finding that Texas intentionally used race to redraw its congressional maps last year, emphasizing that, consistent with its shadow docket order in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/purcell\/\" target=\"_blank\">Purcell v. Gonzalez<\/a>, \u201cthat lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But now, seven months later, the majority decided to do just that, Sotomayor noted, saying it has unleashed \u201chavoc,\u201d and \u201ctramples on that principle of restraint,\u201d established in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/purcell\/\" target=\"_blank\">Purcell<\/a>.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cTo switch to the 2023 Redistricting Plan now, however, county elections officials will have to reassign hundreds of thousands of voters across the State to new congressional districts,\u201d Sotomayor wrote. \u201cThree of Alabama\u2019s counties will be particularly hard hit because they are split across two congressional districts. These counties have about 600,000 registered voters between them (roughly 15% of the State\u2019s total number of registered voters).&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the order, the majority seems to suggest that Purcell only applies to lower courts, not the Supreme Court, by emphasizing \u201clower\u201d federal courts, rather than just federal courts.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But, as Columbia Law School professor Jamal Greene <a href=\"https:\/\/bsky.app\/profile\/jamalgreene.bsky.social\/post\/3mne3and3pc2r\" target=\"_blank\">noted<\/a>, Justice Kavanaugh said otherwise in 2022\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.brennancenter.org\/sites\/default\/files\/2022-07\/2022.03.07_Denying_Stay.pdf?inline=1\" target=\"_blank\">Moore v. Harper<\/a>, where he agreed with denying plaintiff\u2019s request for \u201can order from this Court requiring North Carolina to change its existing congressional election districts for the upcoming 2022 primary and general elections.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cIt is too late for the federal courts to order that the district lines be changed for the 2022 primary and general elections,\u201d Kavanaugh wrote.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kavanaugh went on to cite his recent concurrence in Merrill v. Allen \u2014 the first time Alabama\u2019s congressional map appeared before the court. In that order, issued in February 2022, the Supreme Court vacated the lower court\u2019s injunction of the map\u2019s use, saying it was too close to the election.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cIn addition to being wrong on the merits, the Court\u2019s decision inflicts two grave harms on the public,\u201d Sotomayor wrote. \u201cIt debases the democratic process by upending Alabama\u2019s entire election in the name of permitting Alabama to discriminate against Black Alabamians. It also corrodes the rule of law by rewarding Alabama\u2019s gamesmanship and outright defiance of court orders.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Ashley Cleaves contributed to this report<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":69272,"template":"","meta":{"content-type":"","header_eyebrow_text":"","header_subtitle":"","display_share_icons":true,"custom_share_text":"","ep_exclude_from_search":false,"manual_last_updated":"","sortable_date":"2026-06-03 12:02:34","auto_update_manual_last_updated":false,"related_links":[],"_display_featured_image":true,"footnotes":""},"article-type":[47],"state":[19],"topic":[43,54],"coauthors":[350],"class_list":["post-70235","alerts","type-alerts","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","article-type-democracy-alert","state-alabama","topic-litigation","topic-redistricting"],"featured_image_src":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424-1024x683.jpg","yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Supreme Court&#039;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court&#039;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"&quot;More and more, this Court shows itself to be little more than a partisan tool engaged in results-oriented jurisprudence,&quot; Prof. Hasen wrote.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Democracy Docket\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/democracydocket\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-06-03T16:14:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424-1024x683.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"683\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Supreme Court&#039;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"&quot;More and more, this Court shows itself to be little more than a partisan tool engaged in results-oriented jurisprudence,&quot; Prof. Hasen wrote.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@DemocracyDocket\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"Jim Saksa\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court's Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/AP26137285569424.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-03T16:02:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-03T16:14:12+00:00\",\"description\":\"The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/AP26137285569424.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/AP26137285569424.jpg\",\"width\":8192,\"height\":5464,\"caption\":\"Participants from a coalition of voting rights groups march over the historic Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, on May 16, 2026, following a prayer service at Tabernacle Baptist Church. This event is part of the All Roads Lead to the South: National Day of Action. The mobilization of activists and supporters continues at the Alabama State Capitol in Montgomery, Alabama, in response to recent redistricting actions in Southern states following the Supreme Court decision of Louisiana v. Callais. (Photo by Melissa Bender\\\/NurPhoto via AP)\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"News\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/news-alerts\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Supreme Court&#8217;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Democracy Docket\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.democracydocket.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court's Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance","description":"The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court's Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance","og_description":"\"More and more, this Court shows itself to be little more than a partisan tool engaged in results-oriented jurisprudence,\" Prof. Hasen wrote.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/","og_site_name":"Democracy Docket","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/democracydocket\/","article_modified_time":"2026-06-03T16:14:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":683,"url":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424-1024x683.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Supreme Court's Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance","twitter_description":"\"More and more, this Court shows itself to be little more than a partisan tool engaged in results-oriented jurisprudence,\" Prof. Hasen wrote.","twitter_site":"@DemocracyDocket","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"6 minutes","Written by":"Jim Saksa"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/","url":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/","name":"Supreme Court's Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424.jpg","datePublished":"2026-06-03T16:02:34+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-03T16:14:12+00:00","description":"The U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s Republican-appointed majority erased all doubts about the sweeping nature of its recent voting rights jurisprudence Tuesday night with a shadow docket ruling that effectively reverses the Court\u2019s own decision in the same matter just three years ago.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/AP26137285569424.jpg","width":8192,"height":5464,"caption":"Participants from a coalition of voting rights groups march over the historic Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, on May 16, 2026, following a prayer service at Tabernacle Baptist Church. This event is part of the All Roads Lead to the South: National Day of Action. The mobilization of activists and supporters continues at the Alabama State Capitol in Montgomery, Alabama, in response to recent redistricting actions in Southern states following the Supreme Court decision of Louisiana v. Callais. (Photo by Melissa Bender\/NurPhoto via AP)"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/supreme-courts-alabama-redistricting-ruling-marks-brazen-reversal-of-its-previous-stance\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"News","item":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/news-alerts\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Supreme Court&#8217;s Alabama redistricting ruling marks brazen reversal of its previous stance"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/","name":"Democracy Docket","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/alerts\/70235","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/alerts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/alerts"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/alerts\/70235\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":70240,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/alerts\/70235\/revisions\/70240"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/69272"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"article-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article-type?post=70235"},{"taxonomy":"state","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state?post=70235"},{"taxonomy":"topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topic?post=70235"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.democracydocket.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=70235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}