allen v milligan ala
https://yyy.theguardian.com/law/2023/jun/08/supreme-court-voting-rights-decision-allen-milligan
alabama discriminated against Black voters when it drew its seven congressional districts last year, the supreme court has ruled, a decision that is a major victory for the Voting Rights Act (VRA).
The decision was 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining the court’s three liberal justices in the opinion. Writing for the majority of the court, Roberts noted the court was rejecting Alabama’s effort to get it to rewrite its longstanding interpretation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which outlaws voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race. The decision means that section 2 of the law, one of its last remaining powerful provisions, will remain intact.
“The heart of these cases is not about the law as it exists. It is about Alabama’s attempt to remake our §2 jurisprudence anew,” Roberts wrote. “We find Alabama’s new approach to §2 compelling neither in theory nor in practice. We accordingly decline to recast our §2 case law as Alabama requests.”
The decision was an unexpected outcome from Roberts and the court, both of whom have significantly hollowed out the Voting Rights Act in recent years. As a young lawyer in the justice department in the 1980s, Roberts argued for narrowing the interpretation of section 2. The court has rarely sided with voting rights litigants who allege voting discrimination.
The decision in the case, Allen v Milligan, means that Alabama will have to draw its congressional map to include a second majority-Black district. Black voters currently comprise a majority of the voting age population in just one district, despite making up a quarter of the state’s population.
“This decision is a crucial win against the continued onslaught of attacks on voting rights,” Deuel Ross, an attorney with the NAACPLegal Defense and Educational Fund who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “Alabama attempted to rewrite federal law by saying race had no place in redistricting. But because of the state’s sordid and well-documented history of racial discrimination, race must be used to remedy that past and ensure communities of color are not boxed out of the electoral process.”
The ruling also is a boon to similar cases in Louisiana, Texas and Georgia, where litigants currently are suing to require the drawing of additional majority-minority districts. “This precedent also lays a foundation for fair map decisions in our other Section 2 cases,” said Marina Jenkins, the executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, a Democratic-aligned group that is involved in those cases.
Alabama could have easily drawn a second majority-Black district, the challengers in the case argued. They offered several sample maps with possible configurations of how to do so. Last year, a three-judge panel unanimously agreed with that argument and ordered the state to do so. The panel, which included two judges appointed by Donald Trump, said the question of whether the state had violated the law was “not a close one”.
Notably, the majority rejected an argument from Alabama that it should only be required to draw an additional majority-Black district if the plaintiffs could prove it was required without considering race. That theory would have made it extremely difficult for plaintiffs to show discrimination had occurred in redistricting against minority voters.
“This court has long recognized – and as all members of this court today agree – the text of §2 establishes an effects test, not an intent test,” Kavanaugh wrote in a concurring opinion. “The effects test, as applied by Gingles to redistricting, requires in certain circumstances that courts account for the race of voters so as to prevent the cracking or packing – whether intentional or not – of large and geographically compact minority populations.”
Joe Biden praised the court’s decision and said he and Vice-President Kamala Harris would continue to push Congress to restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. The US supreme court, in a 5-4 opinion authored by Roberts in 2013, gutted a key provision of the law that required states with a history of voting discrimination to get voting changes pre-cleared by the federal government before they went into effect.
“The right to vote and have that vote counted is sacred and fundamental – it is the right from which all of our other rights spring. Key to that right is ensuring that voters pick their elected officials – not the other way around,” the president said in a statement. “Today’s decision confirms the basic principle that voting practices should not discriminate on account of race, but our work is not done.”
Merrick Garland, the US attorney general, praised the decision in a statement.
“Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race,” he said. “The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow.”
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined at various parts by fellow conservative justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. The supreme court has long misinterpreted section 2, he wrote, restating his prior view that it does not even apply to redistricting cases. He also wrote that the majority opinion required too much consideration of race in drawing district lines and urged a more race-neutral approach.
“As applied here, the amended §2 thus falls on the wrong side of ‘the line between measures that remedy or prevent unconstitutional actions and measures that make a substantive change in the governing law’,” Thomas wrote. “It replaces the constitutional right against intentionally discriminatory districting with an amorphous race-based right to a ‘fair’ distribution of political power, a ‘right’ that cannot be implemented without requiring the very evils the constitution forbids.”
Alito, writing separately in dissent, also said that the plaintiffs advocating for an additional majority-minority district “must show at the outset that such a district can be created without making race the predominant factor in its creation”.
“Today’s decision unnecessarily sets the VRA on a perilous and unfortunate path,” he wrote.
The supreme court intervened in February 2022 on an emergency request and allowed Alabama’s maps to go into effect for the 2022 elections. Even though Alabama’s election was not until the end of May, the court said it was too close to the election to upend the map.
Alabama had argued that the lower court had wrongly decided the case by taking race too much into account.The challengers in the case should have been required to show that they could draw a second majority-Black district without considering race at all, Edmund LaCour, the state’s solicitor general, said during oral argument last year.
The case was seen as a “textbook” example of the kind of discrimination in redistricting that section 2 of the Voting Rights Act was designed to prevent. The provision outlaws any voting practice that discriminates on the basis of race and litigants have frequently used it to challenge electoral maps that make it harder for minorities to elect the candidate of their choice.It was widely understood to be the most powerful remaining provision in the landmark civil rights law after the US supreme court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v Holder. That decision blocked another part of the landmark civil rights law requiring states with a history of voting discrimination to get their changes approved by the federal government.
| jan 26, 2023 | Notification regarding substitution of party pursuant to S. Ct. R. 35.3 filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/253234/20230126152052662_Merrill%20-%20Letter%20re%20Rule%2035.3%20-%201.26.2023.pdf) | Notification regarding substitution of party pursuant to S. Ct. R. 35.3 filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/253234/20230126152052662_Merrill%20-%20Letter%20re%20Rule%2035.3%20-%201.26.2023.pdf) | Notification regarding substitution of party pursuant to S. Ct. R. 35.3 filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/253234/20230126152052662_Merrill%20-%20Letter%20re%20Rule%2035.3%20-%201.26.2023.pdf) | Notification regarding substitution of party pursuant to S. Ct. R. 35.3 filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/253234/20230126152052662_Merrill%20-%20Letter%20re%20Rule%2035.3%20-%201.26.2023.pdf) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2022 | Argued. For appellants/petitioners: Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala. For appellees: Deuel Ross, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Abha Khanna, Seattle, Wash. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting appellees/respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED. | Argued. For appellants/petitioners: Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala. For appellees: Deuel Ross, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Abha Khanna, Seattle, Wash. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting appellees/respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED. | Argued. For appellants/petitioners: Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala. For appellees: Deuel Ross, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Abha Khanna, Seattle, Wash. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting appellees/respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED. | Argued. For appellants/petitioners: Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala. For appellees: Deuel Ross, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Abha Khanna, Seattle, Wash. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting appellees/respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED. |
| Aug 24, 2022 | Reply of appellants **John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State**, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/234404/20220824160744143_Merrill%20-%20Merits%20Reply%20Brief%20FINAL.pdf) | |||
| Aug 24, 2022 | Reply of John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. submitted. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/234404/20220824160744143_Merrill%20-%20Merits%20Reply%20Brief%20FINAL.pdf) | |||
| Aug 24, 2022 | Reply of appellants/petitioners John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/234404/20220824160744143_Merrill%20-%20Merits%20Reply%20Brief%20FINAL.pdf) | |||
| Aug 22, 2022 | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents GRANTED. VIDED. |
| Aug 22, 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED. | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED. |
| Jul 29, 2022 | Application (22A82) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file appellants'/petitioners' consolidated reply brief on the merits until August 24, 2022. VIDED. | Application (22A82) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file appellants'/petitioners' consolidated reply brief on the merits until August 24, 2022. VIDED. | Application (22A82) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file appellants'/petitioners' consolidated reply brief on the merits until August 24, 2022. VIDED. | Application (22A82) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file appellants'/petitioners' consolidated reply brief on the merits until August 24, 2022. VIDED. |
| Jul 22, 2022 | Application (22A82) to extend the time to file appellants/petitioners consolidated reply brief on the merits from August 10, 2022 to August 24, 2022, submitted to Justice Thomas. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 21, 2022 | CIRCULATED | CIRCULATED | CIRCULATED | CIRCULATED |
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Constitutional Accountability Center submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of District of Columbia submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Voting Rights Practitioners submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| ||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Alabama Historians submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al. submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Local Governments submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of U.W. Clemon, Fred D. Gray, Henry Sanders, the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, and Social Science Professors submitted. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/230297/20220718170256250_Merrill%20v.%20Milligan%20Amicus%20-%20AS%20FILED.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/230211/20220718100024007_Merrill%20Amicus%20Brief%20-%20Final.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion of United States for leave to participate in oral argument and for divided argument submitted. :{Proof of Service:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of United States submitted. :{Proof of Service:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Bipartisan Group of Senators and Congressional Staff Member-Supporters of the 1982 Voting Rights Act Amendments and 2006 Voting Rights Act Reauthorization submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of National Congress of American Indians submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Republican Former Governors submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Campaign Legal Center submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| ||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of UCLA Social Scientists submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Professors Jowei Chen, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos, and Christopher S. Warshaw submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Press Robinson, Edgar Cage, Dorothy Nairne, Alice Washington, Clee Earnest Lowe, Davante Lewis, Martha Davis, Ambrose Sims, **NAACP** Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity and Justice submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of American Bar Association submitted. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/230211/20220718100024007_Merrill%20Amicus%20Brief%20-%20Final.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Representative Terri Sewell et al. submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion of Marcus Caster, et al. for divided argument submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Computational Redistricting Experts submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of The Southern Poverty Law Center, The League of Women Voters of Alabama, The League Of Women Voters of The United States, and Stand-Up Mobile submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of The Brennan Center for Justice submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center, et al. submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Bipartisan Group of Senators and Congressional Staff Member-Supporters of the 1982 Voting Rights Act Amendments and 2006 Voting Rights Act Reauthorization filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Professor Travis Crum submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of U.W. Clemon, Fred D. Gray, Henry Sanders, the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, and Social Science Professors filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/230297/20220718170256250_Merrill%20v.%20Milligan%20Amicus%20-%20AS%20FILED.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of National Congress of American Indians filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of UCLA Social Scientists filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees appellees and respondents. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion of United States for leave to participate in oral argument and for divided argument submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Representative Terri Sewell, et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Press Robinson, et al. filed. (Distributed) :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The Southern Poverty Law Center, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Alabama Historians filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Professor Travis Crum filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Republican Former Governors filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of The Brennan Center for Justice filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Campaign Legal Center filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| ||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Amicus brief of Press Robinson, Edgar Cage, Dorothy Nairne, Alice Washington, Clee Earnest Lowe, Davante Lewis, Martha Davis, Ambrose Sims, NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity and Justice submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Professors Jowei Chen, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos, and Christopher S. Warshaw filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Computational Redistricting Experts filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Representative Terri Sewell et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Voting Rights Practitioners filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| ||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of District of Columbia, et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 18, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Local Governments filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of Marcus Caster, et al. submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of appellees Marcus Caster, et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of Evan Milligan, et al. submitted. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of respondents Marcus Caster, et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of appellees Evan Milligan, et al. filed. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 11, 2022 | Brief of appellees Evan Milligan, et al. filed (in 21-1086). :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jul 1, 2022 | Application (21A871) to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A871) to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A871) to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A871) to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. |
| Jun 30, 2022 | Application (21A869) for leave to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A869) for leave to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A869) for leave to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. | Application (21A869) for leave to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas. |
| Jun 24, 2022 | Application of Milligan, et al. (21A869) to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jun 24, 2022 | Application (21A871) of Caster, et al. to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jun 24, 2022 | Application of Milligan, et al. (21A869) to file appellees' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jun 22, 2022 | Record requested from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of Birmingham, Alabama. | Record requested from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of Birmingham, Alabama. | Record requested from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of Birmingham, Alabama. | Record requested from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of Birmingham, Alabama. |
| Jun 14, 2022 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022. VIDED. | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022. VIDED. | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022. VIDED. | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022. VIDED. |
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of John Wahl, Chairman, Alabama State Republican Executive Committee filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of **Citizens United,**et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of American Legislative Exchange Council filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of The National Republican Redistricting Trust filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Singleton Plaintiffs in support of neither party filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of **Project on Fair Representation** filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Coastal Alabama Partnership filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of United States Representatives from Alabama filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of **Lawyers Democracy Fund** filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of America First Legal filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The State of Louisiana, et al filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| May 2, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Republican National Committee filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Apr 29, 2022 | Brief amici curiae of**Senator John Braun,** et al. filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Apr 29, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Public Interest Legal Foundation filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Apr 29, 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of **Alabama Center for Law and Liberty** filed. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Apr 25, 2022 | Brief of appellants John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/221827/20220425152045101_Milligan%20-%20Merits%20Br%20FINAL%204-25.pdf) | |||
| Apr 25, 2022 | Joint appendix filed (three volumes). VIDED. (Statement of costs filed) :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Apr 25, 2022 | Brief of appellants/petitioners John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/221827/20220425152045101_Milligan%20-%20Merits%20Br%20FINAL%204-25.pdf) | |||
| Mar 31, 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| Mar 30, 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Marcus Caster, et al. [Blanket Consent](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/219762/20220330131419493_2022-03-30%20-%20Caster%20-%20Blanket%20Consent.pdf) | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Marcus Caster, et al. [Blanket Consent](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/219762/20220330131419493_2022-03-30%20-%20Caster%20-%20Blanket%20Consent.pdf) | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Marcus Caster, et al. [Blanket Consent](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/219762/20220330131419493_2022-03-30%20-%20Caster%20-%20Blanket%20Consent.pdf) | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Marcus Caster, et al. [Blanket Consent](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/219762/20220330131419493_2022-03-30%20-%20Caster%20-%20Blanket%20Consent.pdf) |
| Mar 30, 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Evan Milligan, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Evan Milligan, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Evan Milligan, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Evan Milligan, et al. :{Blanket Consent:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| Mar 21, 2022 | Upon consideration of the motion to modify or amend the question presented, the question presented in these cases is amended as follows: Whether the State of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. VIDED. | Upon consideration of the motion to modify or amend the question presented, the question presented in these cases is amended as follows: Whether the State of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. VIDED. | Upon consideration of the motion to modify or amend the question presented, the question presented in these cases is amended as follows: Whether the State of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. VIDED. | Upon consideration of the motion to modify or amend the question presented, the question presented in these cases is amended as follows: Whether the State of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. VIDED. |
| Mar 14, 2022 | Application (21A493) granted by Justice Thomas for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits provided that the opening brief does not exceed 18,000 words and the reply brief does not exceed 10,000 words. VIDED. | Application (21A493) granted by Justice Thomas for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits provided that the opening brief does not exceed 18,000 words and the reply brief does not exceed 10,000 words. VIDED. | Application (21A493) granted by Justice Thomas for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits provided that the opening brief does not exceed 18,000 words and the reply brief does not exceed 10,000 words. VIDED. | Application (21A493) granted by Justice Thomas for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits provided that the opening brief does not exceed 18,000 words and the reply brief does not exceed 10,000 words. VIDED. |
| Mar 8, 2022 | Joint motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix, appellants', and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including April 25, 2022. The time to file appellees' and respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including July 11, 2022. VIDED. | Joint motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix, appellants', and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including April 25, 2022. The time to file appellees' and respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including July 11, 2022. VIDED. | Joint motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix, appellants', and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including April 25, 2022. The time to file appellees' and respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including July 11, 2022. VIDED. | Joint motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix, appellants', and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including April 25, 2022. The time to file appellees' and respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including July 11, 2022. VIDED. |
| Mar 8, 2022 | Application (21A493) of appellants/petitioners for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits, submitted to Justice Thomas. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
|
|
|
| Mar 8, 2022 | Response of appellants and petitioners to the motion to modify or amend the question presented filed. VIDED. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/218058/20220308164614971_Milligan%20-%20Resp%20to%20Mot%20to%20Am%20QP%20FINAL.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Mar 4, 2022 | Motion to modify or amend the question presented filed by appellees and respondents. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Mar 1, 2022 | Joint motion of the parties for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Joint motion of the parties for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Joint motion of the parties for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | Joint motion of the parties for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
| Feb 22, 2022 | This case is consolidated with No. 21-1087, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The question presented in these cases is: Whether the District Courts in these cases correctly found a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. | This case is consolidated with No. 21-1087, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The question presented in these cases is: Whether the District Courts in these cases correctly found a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. | This case is consolidated with No. 21-1087, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The question presented in these cases is: Whether the District Courts in these cases correctly found a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. | This case is consolidated with No. 21-1087, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The question presented in these cases is: Whether the District Courts in these cases correctly found a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. |
| Feb 22, 2022 | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-1086. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-1086. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.” | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-1086. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-1086. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.” | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-1086. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-1086. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.” | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-1086. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-1086. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.” |
| Feb 7, 2022 | Application (21A375) referred to the Court. | Application (21A375) referred to the Court. | Application (21A375) referred to the Court. | Application (21A375) referred to the Court. |
| Feb 7, 2022 | Application (21A375) granted by the Court. The application is treated as a jurisdictional statement (No. 21-1086), and probable jurisdiction is noted. The district court's January 24, 2022 preliminary injunction in No. 2:21-cv-1530 is stayed pending further order of the Court. Justice Kavanaugh, with whom Justice Alito joins, concurring in grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). The Chief Justice dissenting from grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). Justice Kagan, with whom Justice Breyer and Justice Sotomayor join, dissenting from grant of applications for stays. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). | Application (21A375) granted by the Court. The application is treated as a jurisdictional statement (No. 21-1086), and probable jurisdiction is noted. The district court's January 24, 2022 preliminary injunction in No. 2:21-cv-1530 is stayed pending further order of the Court. Justice Kavanaugh, with whom Justice Alito joins, concurring in grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). The Chief Justice dissenting from grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). Justice Kagan, with whom Justice Breyer and Justice Sotomayor join, dissenting from grant of applications for stays. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). | Application (21A375) granted by the Court. The application is treated as a jurisdictional statement (No. 21-1086), and probable jurisdiction is noted. The district court's January 24, 2022 preliminary injunction in No. 2:21-cv-1530 is stayed pending further order of the Court. Justice Kavanaugh, with whom Justice Alito joins, concurring in grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). The Chief Justice dissenting from grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). Justice Kagan, with whom Justice Breyer and Justice Sotomayor join, dissenting from grant of applications for stays. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). | Application (21A375) granted by the Court. The application is treated as a jurisdictional statement (No. 21-1086), and probable jurisdiction is noted. The district court's January 24, 2022 preliminary injunction in No. 2:21-cv-1530 is stayed pending further order of the Court. Justice Kavanaugh, with whom Justice Alito joins, concurring in grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). The Chief Justice dissenting from grant of applications for stay. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). Justice Kagan, with whom Justice Breyer and Justice Sotomayor join, dissenting from grant of applications for stays. (Detached :{opinion:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}:). |
| Feb 2, 2022 | Response to application from respondents Evan Milligan, et al. filed. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Feb 2, 2022 | Reply of applicants John Merrill, et al. filed. [Reply](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/212173/20220202211458526_Milligan%20-%20SCOTUS%20Reply%20FINAL.pdf) |
|
| |
| Feb 1, 2022 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by The National Republican Redistricting Trust. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Feb 1, 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by United States Representatives from Alabama. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Feb 1, 2022 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Alabama Center for Law and Liberty. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jan 31, 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Louisiana, et al. VIDED. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jan 31, 2022 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by John Wahl, Chairman, Alabama State Republican Executive Committee. :{Main Document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: |
|
|
|
| Jan 28, 2022 | Application (21A375) for a stay or injunctive relief pending appeal, submitted to Justice Thomas. [Main Document](http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1086/211724/20220128152718926_Milligan%20-%20SCOTUS%20Stay%20App%20-%20FINAL%203.pdf) |
|
|
|
| Jan 28, 2022 | Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due March 9, 2022) :{Jurisdictional Statement:(style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:bolder"):}: | |||
| Jan 28, 2022 | Response to application (21A375) requested by Justice Thomas, due by noon on Wednesday, February 2, 2022. | Response to application (21A375) requested by Justice Thomas, due by noon on Wednesday, February 2, 2022. | Response to application (21A375) requested by Justice Thomas, due by noon on Wednesday, February 2, 2022. | Response to application (21A375) requested by Justice Thomas, due by noon on Wednesday, February 2, 2022. |
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/599/21-1086/
Allen v. Milligan, 599 U.S. _ (2023)
Docket No.
21-1086
Granted:
February 6, 2022
Argued:
October 3, 2022
Justia Summary
In 1992, Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. 10301) Section 2 litigation challenging Alabama’s districting map resulted in Alabama’s first majority-black district and its first black Representative since 1877. Alabama’s congressional map has remained similar since then. Following the 2020 census, the state enacted a new districting map (HB1), which produced only one district in which black voters constituted a majority.
Read More
Annotation
PRIMARY HOLDING
In a case under the Voting Rights Act, the Supreme Court strikes down an Alabama redistricting map that diluted Black voting power.
Syllabus
Read More
Opinions
Opinion (Roberts) Concurrence (Kavanaugh) Dissent (Alito) Dissent (Thomas)
Materials
Oral Arguments Briefs & Filings
Jan 26, 2023 Notification regarding substitution of party pursuant to S. Ct. R. 35.3 filed. VIDED.
Main Document
Oct 4, 2022 Argued. For appellants/petitioners: Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala. For appellees: Deuel Ross, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Abha Khanna, Seattle, Wash. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting appellees/respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
Aug 24, 2022 Reply of appellants John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Aug 24, 2022 Reply of John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Aug 24, 2022 Reply of appellants/petitioners John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Aug 22, 2022 Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents GRANTED. VIDED.
Aug 22, 2022 Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED.
Jul 29, 2022 Application (22A82) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file appellants'/petitioners' consolidated reply brief on the merits until August 24, 2022. VIDED.
Jul 22, 2022 Application (22A82) to extend the time to file appellants/petitioners consolidated reply brief on the merits from August 10, 2022 to August 24, 2022, submitted to Justice Thomas. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 21, 2022 CIRCULATED
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Constitutional Accountability Center submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of District of Columbia submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Voting Rights Practitioners submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Alabama Historians submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al. submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Local Governments submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of U.W. Clemon, Fred D. Gray, Henry Sanders, the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, and Social Science Professors submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion of United States for leave to participate in oral argument and for divided argument submitted.
Proof of Service|Main Document
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of United States submitted.
Proof of Service|Main Document
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Bipartisan Group of Senators and Congressional Staff Member-Supporters of the 1982 Voting Rights Act Amendments and 2006 Voting Rights Act Reauthorization submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of National Congress of American Indians submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Republican Former Governors submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Campaign Legal Center submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of UCLA Social Scientists submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Professors Jowei Chen, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos, and Christopher S. Warshaw submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Press Robinson, Edgar Cage, Dorothy Nairne, Alice Washington, Clee Earnest Lowe, Davante Lewis, Martha Davis, Ambrose Sims, NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity and Justice submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of American Bar Association submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Representative Terri Sewell et al. submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion of Marcus Caster, et al. for divided argument submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Computational Redistricting Experts submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of The Southern Poverty Law Center, The League of Women Voters of Alabama, The League Of Women Voters of The United States, and Stand-Up Mobile submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of The Brennan Center for Justice submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center, et al. submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Bipartisan Group of Senators and Congressional Staff Member-Supporters of the 1982 Voting Rights Act Amendments and 2006 Voting Rights Act Reauthorization filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Professor Travis Crum submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of U.W. Clemon, Fred D. Gray, Henry Sanders, the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, and Social Science Professors filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of National Congress of American Indians filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of UCLA Social Scientists filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion for divided argument filed by appellees appellees and respondents. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion of United States for leave to participate in oral argument and for divided argument submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Representative Terri Sewell, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Press Robinson, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of The Southern Poverty Law Center, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Alabama Historians filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Motion for divided argument filed by appellees and respondents. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Professor Travis Crum filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Republican Former Governors filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of The Brennan Center for Justice filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Campaign Legal Center filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Amicus brief of Press Robinson, Edgar Cage, Dorothy Nairne, Alice Washington, Clee Earnest Lowe, Davante Lewis, Martha Davis, Ambrose Sims, NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity and Justice submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Professors Jowei Chen, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos, and Christopher S. Warshaw filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Computational Redistricting Experts filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Representative Terri Sewell et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Voting Rights Practitioners filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of District of Columbia, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 18, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Local Governments filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of Marcus Caster, et al. submitted.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of appellees Marcus Caster, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of Evan Milligan, et al. submitted.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of respondents Marcus Caster, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Certificate of Word Count
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of appellees Evan Milligan, et al. filed.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 11, 2022 Brief of appellees Evan Milligan, et al. filed (in 21-1086).
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Jul 1, 2022 Application (21A871) to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas.
Jun 30, 2022 Application (21A869) for leave to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit granted by Justice Thomas.
Jun 24, 2022 Application of Milligan, et al. (21A869) to file appellees brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jun 24, 2022 Application (21A871) of Caster, et al. to file respondents' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jun 24, 2022 Application of Milligan, et al. (21A869) to file appellees' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jun 22, 2022 Record requested from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of Birmingham, Alabama.
Jun 14, 2022 ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022. VIDED.
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of John Wahl, Chairman, Alabama State Republican Executive Committee filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Citizens United, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of American Legislative Exchange Council filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of The National Republican Redistricting Trust filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Singleton Plaintiffs in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Project on Fair Representation filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Coastal Alabama Partnership filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amici curiae of United States Representatives from Alabama filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Lawyers Democracy Fund filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of America First Legal filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amici curiae of The State of Louisiana, et al filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
May 2, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Republican National Committee filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Apr 29, 2022 Brief amici curiae of Senator John Braun, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Apr 29, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Public Interest Legal Foundation filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Apr 29, 2022 Brief amicus curiae of Alabama Center for Law and Liberty filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Apr 25, 2022 Brief of appellants John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Apr 25, 2022 Joint appendix filed (three volumes). VIDED. (Statement of costs filed)
Main Document|Main Document|Main Document|Proof of Service
Apr 25, 2022 Brief of appellants/petitioners John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Certificate of Word Count|Proof of Service
Mar 31, 2022 Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, John H. Merrill, Alabama Secretary of State, et al.
Blanket Consent
Mar 30, 2022 Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Marcus Caster, et al.
Blanket Consent
Mar 30, 2022 Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Evan Milligan, et al.
Blanket Consent
Mar 21, 2022 Upon consideration of the motion to modify or amend the question presented, the question presented in these cases is amended as follows: Whether the State of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301. VIDED.
Mar 14, 2022 Application (21A493) granted by Justice Thomas for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits provided that the opening brief does not exceed 18,000 words and the reply brief does not exceed 10,000 words. VIDED.
Mar 8, 2022 Joint motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix, appellants', and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including April 25, 2022. The time to file appellees' and respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including July 11, 2022. VIDED.
Mar 8, 2022 Application (21A493) of appellants/petitioners for leave to file consolidated opening and reply briefs on the merits, submitted to Justice Thomas. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Mar 8, 2022 Response of appellants and petitioners to the motion to modify or amend the question presented filed. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Mar 4, 2022 Motion to modify or amend the question presented filed by appellees and respondents. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Mar 1, 2022 Joint motion of the parties for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits. VIDED.
Main Document
Feb 22, 2022 This case is consolidated with No. 21-1087, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The question presented in these cases is: Whether the District Courts in these cases correctly found a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U. S. C. §10301.
Feb 22, 2022 Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-1086. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-1086. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”
Feb 7, 2022 Application (21A375) referred to the Court.
Feb 7, 2022 Application (21A375) granted by the Court. The application is treated as a jurisdictional statement (No. 21-1086), and probable jurisdiction is noted. The district court's January 24, 2022 preliminary injunction in No. 2:21-cv-1530 is stayed pending further order of the Court. Justice Kavanaugh, with whom Justice Alito joins, concurring in grant of applications for stay. (Detached opinion). The Chief Justice dissenting from grant of applications for stay. (Detached opinion). Justice Kagan, with whom Justice Breyer and Justice Sotomayor join, dissenting from grant of applications for stays. (Detached opinion).
Feb 2, 2022 Response to application from respondents Evan Milligan, et al. filed.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Main Document
Feb 2, 2022 Reply of applicants John Merrill, et al. filed.
Reply|Reply|Proof of Service
Feb 1, 2022 Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by The National Republican Redistricting Trust.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Feb 1, 2022 Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by United States Representatives from Alabama. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Feb 1, 2022 Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Alabama Center for Law and Liberty. VIDED.
Main Document|Proof of Service|Other
Jan 31, 2022 Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Louisiana, et al. VIDED.
Main Document|Other|Proof of Service
Jan 31, 2022 Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by John Wahl, Chairman, Alabama State Republican Executive Committee.
Main Document|Proof of Service
Jan 28, 2022 Application (21A375) for a stay or injunctive relief pending appeal, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Main Document|Lower Court Orders/Opinions|Lower Court Orders/Opinions|Proof of Service
Jan 28, 2022 Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due March 9, 2022)
Jurisdictional Statement|Appendix|Appendix
Jan 28, 2022 Response to application (21A375) requested by Justice Thomas, due by noon on Wednesday, February 2, 2022.