Supreme Court Deliberates South Carolina GOP's Congressional Map: Key Case Tests Intersection of Partisan and Racial Gerrymandering

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating a case involving South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District, challenging the legality of a Republican-drawn map accused of racial gerrymandering. The case, Alexander v. South Carolina Conference of the NAACP, questions whether the GOP intentionally shuffled Black voters to ensure Republican dominance in the district, a claim the party denies. The court’s conservative majority appears inclined to support the South Carolina GOP, expressing doubts about the evidence presented in the lower court and emphasizing the absence of explicit racial data in the

mapmaking process.

Justice Samuel Alito was the most aggressive questioner of the lower court’s decision, arguing the justices need not “rubber stamp” findings by the lower court, “particularly in a case in which the basis for a judgment in favor [of the NAACP] relies very heavily, if not entirely, on expert reports.” | Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images

This case highlights the intricate legal terrain where partisan and racial gerrymandering intersect. The decision could impact future redistricting efforts and carries potential consequences for the balance of power in the House of Representatives. With the 2024 House majority at stake, these rulings gain added significance, especially considering ongoing challenges to state-drawn maps in various states across the country.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Supreme Court Deliberates South Carolina GOP’s Congressional Map: Key Case Tests Intersection of Partisan and Racial Gerrymandering

AUTHOR: Robert M. Kuscu

COMMENTS