WASHINGTON, DC – The Supreme Court’s delayed resolution of a redistricting case in South Carolina has prompted a federal court to intervene, allowing a previously ruled racially gerrymandered congressional district to be used in the upcoming election.
Last year, a federal court found that the Charleston-area district held by Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., was unjustly drawn by excluding thousands of Black voters. However, the same court recently issued an order permitting the district map to be used in the upcoming Congressional election this year.
In a statement, the three-judge panel noted the urgency of the primary election process and the lack of a remedial plan, leading them to make the decision despite the unresolved appeal before the Supreme Court. This ruling is seen as a setback for Democrats who hoped for a more favorable map if redistricting were to take place.
The Supreme Court has been deliberating for months on whether race was improperly considered in the drafting of the map, with both sides emphasizing the need for a timely resolution before the election. Despite an emergency application from Republican state officials to maintain the existing map, the justices have yet to act decisively on the matter.
The South Carolina case, which saw oral arguments back in October, involved debates over the Republican-led efforts to enhance the party’s hold on a competitive district. The redrawing of district boundaries following the 2020 census favored Republican control, leading to changes in electoral outcomes.
Critics, including the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, have accused Republicans of unlawfully factoring race into the redistricting process, resulting in the dilution of Black voting power. These allegations, rooted in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, underscore the ongoing legal battles over fair representation and electoral integrity.
The case echoes similar challenges seen in states like Alabama, where civil rights advocates successfully challenged Republican-drawn maps under the Voting Rights Act. As the legal proceedings continue, the implications for voter representation and political equity remain at the forefront of the debate.