Context:

Federal judges are deliberating whether to require Alabama to submit its congressional maps for preclearance due to past actions that diluted Black voting strength. Black voters and civil rights groups argue for this requirement to prevent future discrimination, following a legal battle over Alabama's congressional map. The 2013 Supreme Court decision removed preclearance but a 'bail-in' provision is being considered to address ongoing issues. Alabama's Solicitor General argues that preclearance is an extreme measure, contending that past actions do not warrant such oversight. Judges are questioning if preclearance or alternative measures are necessary, given the state's history of noncompliance with court orders to ensure fair representation for Black voters.

Dive Deeper:

• Federal judges are considering a request to subject Alabama to preclearance for its congressional maps, as Black voters and civil rights groups argue the state has diluted Black voting strength intentionally.

• The preclearance requirement, established by the Voting Rights Act, mandates federal approval for election changes in states with a history of discrimination; however, this requirement was nullified in 2013 by the Supreme Court.

• The plaintiffs aim to invoke the 'bail-in' provision of the Voting Rights Act, seeking federal oversight for new plans over the next seven years, or alternatively, for the court to retain jurisdiction for addressing new plans.

• Deuel Ross from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund emphasized the need for preclearance to prevent Alabama from regressing, citing the state's defiance of a court order to create a second majority-Black district.

• Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour argues against preclearance, claiming it is an extraordinary remedy that requires multiple violations, and suggests that the state's current situation differs from the historical context of the 1960s.

• Judges questioned whether less stringent alternatives to preclearance could be effective, with Judge Terry Moorer highlighting Alabama's history and questioning if past behavior predicts future actions.

• The same panel of judges had previously blocked Alabama from using a state-drawn map that ignored directives for fair representation of Black voters, with Alabama currently appealing this decision.