Milligan plaintiffs, counsel ask Supreme Court to dismiss state appeal
They argued Alabama’s 2023 map was already set for 2026, leaving the state with no relief to seek.
The Legal Defense Fund, or LDF, alongside co-counsel, filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court last Friday to dismiss an appeal in Alabama’s redistricting case Allen v. Milligan.
In June, the Supreme Court stayed the Northern District of Alabama’s earlier ruling that Alabama’s 2023 congressional map was racially discriminatory, allowing the state’s previously struck 2023 map to be used for 2024 elections.
The stay came after Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall requested in April that the Supreme Court lift a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama ruling and prior Supreme Court ruling blocking the map, citing the court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the district court on May 15, and the district court reiterated its view that the map involved intentional discrimination. A day later, Marshall filed an emergency stay application with the Supreme Court against the district court’s injunction, which the court granted, allowing the 2023 map to be used pending a full appeal.
However, because the Supreme Court’s stay allowed the previously struck 2023 map to be used in the 2026 elections, the LDF argued that the state’s appeal of the lower court ruling is moot and should be dismissed.
Co-counsel organizations argued to the Supreme Court that, if the justices do not dismiss the appeal, they should alternatively affirm the district court’s findings that the 2023 map is racially discriminatory.
“A more fulsome review reveals that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the overwhelming and ‘intensely local corpus of evidence’ compelled its findings of discriminatory intent and vote dilution,” the LDF filing reads.
In a joint statement, Milligan plaintiffs and their counsel described the appeal as a push to disenfranchise Black voters.
“Alabama’s appeal is a disingenuous effort to further restrict Black political power in Alabama, which has long been their ultimate aim,” the Milligan co-counsel said in a joint statement. “Alabama elections have been underway for months now. Elevating this case to the Supreme Court cannot change that. There is no further relief the state could seek now that its 2023 map is in place. The Court should dismiss this fruitless appeal.”
According to the LDF, if the appeal is dismissed, the case will likely return to the district court for retrial in 2027.
The plaintiffs in the Milligan case are Evan Milligan, Khadidah Stone, Letetia Jackson, Shalela Dowdy, Greater Birmingham Ministries and the Alabama State Conference of the NAACP.
Plaintiffs are represented by the Legal Defense Fund, American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Alabama, Hogan Lovells LLP and Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher & Goldfarb.
