It's been just over a week since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in the Louisiana v. Callais case. Since then, several states have already taken steps to pass new congressional maps, including Louisiana and Florida.
There has also been a flurry of court activity with Attorney General Steve Marshall filing three motions with the U.S. Supreme Court, a filing by one of the petitioners of the case against Alabama asking the court to hold the state in contempt for defying the stipulation agreement, a motion they withdrew.
In his latest new filing late Friday, Marshall asks Justice Clarence Thomas, the Circuit Justice for the 11th Circuit, to stay the current order that prevented Alabama from using maps drawn by the legislature in 2023 before May 14th at 10:00 a.m.
"Alabama’s case mirrors Louisiana’s, and they should end the same way: with this year’s elections run with districts based on lawful policy goals, not race," the filing says.
"Plaintiffs would have Alabama hold elections under a map that was erroneously ordered at best and unconstitutional at worst. Nothing requires that result. Americans, no less in Alabama, deserve a republic free of racial sorting now, and state officials deserve an opportunity to give it to them," it continues.
The new request follows the passage of a bill that set the parameters for a special election using the congressional map passed by the legislature in 2023.
RELATED: AG Marshall files emergency motion to restore Alabama’s congressional map ahead of May 19 primary
“I will continue to fight for Alabama to be able to use the congressional map the people’s elected representatives enacted,” Attorney General Marshall said in a statement. “Alabama drew a map based on lawful policy goals, not race, and the Supreme Court’s recent ruling vindicates that approach. We were punished for doing the right thing, and we are asking the Court to correct that now.”
The new filing describes the outcome of the special session and the bill that Governor Kay Ivey signed into law.
“The bill that seems poised to become law would not create a new map but reinstate the “last legislatively enacted Congressional districts”—the 2023 Plan— and authorize a special primary in the event court injunctions are lifted.”
The most likely outcome of that map is a 6-1 map, though some believe that the district held by Congresswoman Terri Sewell could be a swing seat due to population decline and shifting.
1819 News interviewed Marshall on Friday prior to the court filing, in response to growing calls for the legislature to draw a new map that would lead to a 7-0 Republican delegation.
“I don't think that there is a direct legal impediment to stop [the state] other than the injunction. The difference that we have is in Louisiana now, you already have a court order that says, that map is unconstitutional. And so the legislature there has been given full authority to be able to act in the way that they choose to move forward,” Marshall explained.
“Florida, conversely, is not subject to any kind of litigation impediment, and you have the ability of the Florida legislature to act the same way to what Texas did or to what other states have done in being able to draw a new map. The nuance for Alabama is simply that we are right now subject to the order of the three judge panel, and the legislature is having to weigh the impact of that decision on what their next steps are.”
When asked what he would say to those who are calling for a 7-0 map, Marshall didn’t hesitate.
“I would say, continue to watch how this plays out, and see the timing in which the court rules what the relief has given, and then what additional options are available to the legislature.”
Marshall is no stranger to winning fights with big and lasting impact.
Marshall’s work defending Alabama’s Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act (VCAP) in the Boe v. Marshall case led to key discovery that was used in the United States v. Skrmetti case to protect children against radical gender ideology.
He brings the same resolve to success to the state’s fight for a map that represents the will of the people in Washington.
“We shouldn't be treated any differently than what we've seen Democrats do in New England, with straight Democrats representing those states and Congress,” Marshall said.
“Why should Alabama’s map be any different?”
Justice Thomas gave the petitoners until Monday at 5:00 p.m. to respond to the states motion.
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected]
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning, or become a member to gain access to exclusive content and 1819 News merch.
