Allen v. Milligan | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued October 4, 2022 Decided June 8, 2023 | |
Full case name | Wes Allen, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. v. Evan Milligan, et al. Wes Allen, Alabama Secretary of State, et al. v. Marcus Caster, et al. |
Docket nos. | 21-1086 21-1087 |
Citations | 599 U.S. 1 (more) |
Argument | Oral argument |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Decision | Opinion |
Questions presented | |
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. | |
Holding | |
Plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that Alabama's redistricting plan violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama affirmed. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Roberts (except as to Part III–B–1), joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Jackson |
Plurality | Roberts (Part III–B–1), joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson |
Concurrence | Kavanaugh (all but Part III–B–1) |
Dissent | Thomas, joined by Gorsuch; Alito (Parts II–A and II–B); Barrett (Parts II and III) |
Dissent | Alito, joined by Gorsuch |
Laws applied | |
Voting Rights Act of 1965 |
Allen v. Milligan, 599 U. S. 1 (2023),[note 1] is a United States Supreme Court case related to redistricting under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). The appellees and respondents argued that Alabama's congressional districts discriminated against African-American voters. The Court ruled 5–4 that Alabama's districts likely violated the VRA, maintained an injunction that required Alabama to create an additional majority-minority district.
Cite error: There are <ref group=note>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}}
template (see the help page).