- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Federal Court Rejects Alabama’s Emergency Request For A Stay In Redistricting Case
Posted on 5/8/26 at 10:42 pm
Posted on 5/8/26 at 10:42 pm
WBRC
Friday, a federal court in Alabama denied Secretary of State Wes Allen’s emergency request for a stay in a congressional redistricting case, saying they lack the authority to intervene while the case is appealed to the nation’s highest court.
Allen had argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais, changed the legal standards governing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Adding that the Callais ruling justified revisiting Alabama’s long-running redistricting litigation.
The judges rejection of Alabama’s emergency request comes as a contentious Special Session wrapped up in Montgomery Friday, where lawmakers passed two bills, creating a special primary election.
That special election would only take place if the U.S. supreme court lifts an injunction that requires Alabama to use a court-drawn map through 2030.
Attorney general Steve Marshal has made an emergency request for the nation’s highest court to reconsider the case.
U.W. Clemon, a lawyer in one of the civil rights cases that gave Alabama its current congressional map, says he believes the court will reject Alabama again.
Friday, a federal court in Alabama denied Secretary of State Wes Allen’s emergency request for a stay in a congressional redistricting case, saying they lack the authority to intervene while the case is appealed to the nation’s highest court.
Allen had argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais, changed the legal standards governing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Adding that the Callais ruling justified revisiting Alabama’s long-running redistricting litigation.
The judges rejection of Alabama’s emergency request comes as a contentious Special Session wrapped up in Montgomery Friday, where lawmakers passed two bills, creating a special primary election.
That special election would only take place if the U.S. supreme court lifts an injunction that requires Alabama to use a court-drawn map through 2030.
Attorney general Steve Marshal has made an emergency request for the nation’s highest court to reconsider the case.
U.W. Clemon, a lawyer in one of the civil rights cases that gave Alabama its current congressional map, says he believes the court will reject Alabama again.
2
Posted on 5/9/26 at 9:12 am to Ramblin Wreck
The modern Black Robe Tyranny. We had better get some of these egotistical judges back in line.
Posted on 5/9/26 at 9:15 am to Bamafig
Frankly, Bama should put the new map in place in compliance with the SCOTUS ruling. They are correct that Callais has overturned the prior map because it was forced to be drawn under an unconstitutional (i.e., illegal) standard.
Posted on 5/9/26 at 9:16 am to Ramblin Wreck
quote:
U.W. Clemon, a lawyer in one of the civil rights cases that gave Alabama its current congressional map, says he believes the court will reject Alabama again.
I don't know how they could. They referenced the Alabama case in their recent Louisiana decision and all but stated they would have ruled differently if they had been presented with the same argument.
ETA: UW Clemon is a racist piece of garbage.
This post was edited on 5/9/26 at 9:17 am
Posted on 5/9/26 at 9:38 am to udtiger
quote:
They are correct that Callais has overturned the prior map because it was forced to be drawn under an unconstitutional (i.e., illegal) standard.
Callais didn’t rule on AL’s map.
This post was edited on 5/9/26 at 9:39 am
Posted on 5/9/26 at 11:36 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Callais didn’t rule on AL’s map.
The previous ruling that ordered and approved that map was based on pre-Callais analysis/guidance. It is invalid in its face.
Unless unconstitutional racially drawn congressional districts are only prohibited in Louisiana.
This post was edited on 5/9/26 at 11:38 am
Posted on 5/9/26 at 11:39 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Callais didn’t rule on AL’s map.
If Alabama's map was created due to gerrymandering forced along racial lines, Callais directly applies to it.
I haven't read up on the Alabama case so I'm not sure if there are great enough differences for Callais to not be a (or the) deciding factor.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News