Plaintiffs in Georgia Redistricting Lawsuit Offer Remedial State Legislative Maps
General Assembly’s New State Senate Map Proposal Likely Violates Court’s Order
ATLANTA — Plaintiffs in Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc. v. Raffensperger sent a today to the Georgia House and Senate Reapportionment & Redistricting Committees outlining legal concerns about a proposed state Senate map released yesterday by the Senate Reapportionment & Redistricting Committee.
The letter also provides legislators with proposed state House and Senate maps that would comply with a federal court order issued on Oct. 26, 2023.
In that decision, the court ruled in favor of the Alpha Phi Alpha plaintiffs and ordered the General Assembly to redraw maps with two additional Black-majority districts in the Senate and five new Black-majority districts in the House by Dec. 8, 2023.
The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Georgia, and WilmerHale, which represent the Alpha Phi Alpha plaintiffs, say the Senate map released by the committee yesterday fails to remedy the specific districts that the court said were in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
“In sum: the Committee Plan operates a shell game, in which Black voters in the vote dilution area identified by the Court gain no new opportunities, and districts that the Court specifically struck down remain intact,” says the letter that plaintiffs’ counsel sent to the House and Senate Committees.
The technical files associated with the proposed maps (“Block Equivalency Files”) can be found .
Voting Rights
Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc v. Raffensperger
Voting Rights
Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc v. Raffensperger
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Voting Rights
Election Day is Over. Why is the Electoral College Voting Now?Election Day is Over. Why is the Electoral College Voting Now?
The Electoral College meets December 17th to certify the results of the 2024 election, but why? The ACLU breaks down if the process is worth keeping. -
New York Supreme CourtDec 2024
Voting Rights
New York Communities for Change v. Nassau CountyNew York Communities for Change v. Nassau County
This case in New York state court centers on the landmark John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA) and the New York Municipal Home Rule Law (MHRL). The NYVRA, like several other state voting rights acts enacted in recent years, expands upon the federal Voting Rights Act’s protections against racial vote dilution. The MHRL prohibits racial discrimination and partisan gerrymandering in local-level redistricting. The ACLU’s Voting Rights Project and State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the New York Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and Steptoe LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of voters of color in Nassau County, New York alleging that a redistricting plan implemented in 2023 for Nassau County’s legislative districts dilutes the voting strength of Black, Latino, and Asian residents and is gerrymandered for partisan advantage in violation of the NYVRA and the MHRL. -
ArizonaNov 2024
Voting Rights
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona v. RicherAmerican Civil Liberties Union of Arizona v. Richer
We sued elections officials in Arizona to extend the mail ballot “cure” deadline after ballot processing delays threatened to disenfranchise thousands of voters without notice. -
Press ReleaseNov 2024
Voting Rights
Civil Rights Groups Respond to Flawed Trial Court Opinion on New York Voting Rights ActCivil Rights Groups Respond to Flawed Trial Court Opinion on New York Voting Rights Act
ORANGE COUNTY, Calif. — On November 7, a New York State Supreme Court trial judge issued an opinion striking down the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA). Today, the Legal Defense Fund, American Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York American Civil Liberties Union, and Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law issued the following statement in response to the ruling: “The NYVRA is unquestionably constitutional, and protects the freedom to vote for all New Yorkers by helping to ensure voters are not subjected to discrimination when participating in the political process. “The Nov. 7 decision by a state trial judge is deeply flawed and plainly incorrect. We fully expect the decision to be reversed on appeal. It flies in the face of basic legal principles and constitutes a stunning overreach in striking down the entire law, including provisions that are not at issue in the case. “To put it simply, the NYVRA does not discriminate, it bans discrimination – and in doing so protects New Yorkers’ most fundamental right. “New York is stronger when everyone has an equal opportunity to vote.”