Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

Redistricting lawsuits in the 2020 redistricting cycle

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Election Policy VNT Logo.png
Redistricting
State legislative and congressional redistricting after the 2020 census
General information
State-by-state redistricting procedures • Majority-minority districts • Gerrymandering
The 2020 cycle
United States census, 2020 • Congressional apportionment • Redistricting committees • Deadlines • 2022 House elections with multiple incumbents • New U.S.House districts created after apportionment • Congressional maps • State legislative maps • Lawsuits • Status of redistricting after the 2020 census
Redrawn maps
Redistricting before 2024 elections • Redistricting before 2026 elections
Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker

Redistricting is the process of enacting new district boundaries for elected offices, particularly for offices in the U.S. House of Representatives and state legislatures.

All United States Representatives and state legislators are elected from political divisions called districts. The states redraw district lines every 10 years following completion of the United States census. The federal government requires that districts must have nearly equal populations and must not discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity.[1] This article includes a selection of lawsuits that arose during the course of the 2020 redistricting cycle.

Lawsuits by state

Below are written summaries of redistricting lawsuits challenging enacted congressional or legislative maps after the 2020 census. States are listed in alphabetical order. Lawsuits within states are listed in reverse chronological order, with the most recent lawsuit appearing first.

See also: Redistricting in Alabama after the 2020 census

Post-enactment lawsuits (see Allen v. Milligan)

This section provides overviews of lawsuits challenging redistricting maps that were filed after Alabama enacted maps for the 2020 redistricting cycle.

State appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court

On June 6, 2025, the state appealed a May 2025 ruling that the Alabama State Legislature intentionally discriminated against Black voters with its 2023 congressional district map.[2]

Federal court considers state-drawn congressional map

The same panel that rejected the state's revised congressional boundaries before the 2024 election, which led to the use of court-created districts in that election, decided whether the state-drawn map diluted Black votes. The state defended the legislature's map, and the plaintiffs sought to make the court-drawn map permanent.[3] A trial began on February 10, 2025. The panel ruled on May 8, 2025, that the legislature discriminated against Black voters when they approved a congressional map that contained one majority-Black district. The court-drawn map would stay in place until the 2030 redistricting cycle.[4]

U.S. Supreme Court rejects revised congressional map

On September 26, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the state's request to use the district boundaries overturned by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. The decision was unanimous, with none of the justices dissenting. The ruling allowed for the continued consideration of Special Master Richard Allen's proposed district maps by a panel of federal judges. Lead plaintiff Evan Milligan said the ruling was a "victory for all Alabamians" and "definitely a really positive step." Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office had not issued a statement on the decision as of September 26.[5]

Federal court panel overturns Alabama’s revised congressional redistricting plan

A three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama ruled on September 5, 2023, that the revised congressional district boundaries that the Alabama legislature enacted on July 21, 2023, were not in accordance with the Voting Rights Act.[6] The federal district court's order said, "this Court concluded that the 2023 Plan did not remedy the likely Section 2 violation found by this Court and affirmed by the Supreme Court. We, therefore, preliminarily enjoined Secretary Allen from using the 2023 Plan in Alabama’s upcoming 2024 congressional elections."[6] The federal district court ordered its Special Master to submit three proposed remedial plans with the court by September 25, 2023, that comply with the Voting Rights Act and "traditional redistricting principles to the extent reasonably practicable."[6] On September 5, 2023, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen's office said it would appeal the federal court's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. A spokesperson for Allen issued a statement which said, "While we are disappointed in today’s decision, we strongly believe that the legislature’s map complies with the Voting Rights Act and the recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. We intend to promptly seek review from the Supreme Court to ensure that the State can use its lawful congressional districts in 2024 and beyond."[7] Special Master Richard Allen submitted the three maps for the judges' consideration on September 25. One map would create a second congressional district in southeastern Alabama with a 50.1% Black voting-age population, while the other two would create districts with either a 48.7% or 48.5% Black population.[8]

Plaintiffs file objection to state's 2023 revised map

On July 28, 2023, the plaintiffs in Allen v. Milligan objected to the revised congressional district boundaries that the state enacted on July 21, 2023.[9] The plaintiffs' objection argued, "Alabama’s new congressional map ignores this Court’s preliminary injunction order and instead perpetuates the Voting Rights Act violation that was the very reason that the Legislature redrew the map. The new map (known as SB5) fails to address this Court’s ruling that the 2021 congressional map likely violates § 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA)."[10] The plaintiffs requested that the court prohibit the state from using the new boundaries and appoint a special master to draw a new congressional map that the state would use for the remainder of the decade.[9]

U.S. Supreme Court rules Alabama’s congressional map violates the Voting Rights Act

See also: Allen v. Milligan

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 that Alabama's congressional map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and had to be redrawn to include a second majority-Black district. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett formed the minority.[11]

U.S. Supreme Court stays injunction against Alabama’s congressional map

On February 7, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States stayed a preliminary injunction that a three-judge federal district court panel had issued enjoining Alabama from using the congressional redistricting plan that the state had enacted on November 4, 2021. The Supreme Court’s stay meant that the congressional district boundaries adopted by the state will be used for the 2022 elections. The Court also granted a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case, meaning that the Court accepted the case challenging the congressional district maps for either the 2021-2022 term or the 2022-2023 term.[12]

The Court’s majority did not post a full opinion in the case. Four of the nine justices wrote or joined in dissenting opinions, meaning the vote to stay the district court’s injunction was 5-4. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion on granting the stay, which was joined by Justice Samuel Alito. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan issued dissenting opinions, with Kagan’s dissent joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

Federal court panel blocks Alabama’s congressional redistricting plan

A three-judge federal court panel issued a preliminary injunction on Jan. 24 enjoining Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill (R) from conducting the state’s 2022 elections using the congressional redistricting plan that the state adopted on November 4, 2021.[13]

The judges unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs in Milligan v. Merrill are substantially likely to establish, among other factors, “that Black Alabamians are sufficiently numerous to constitute a voting-age majority in a second congressional district,” and “Black voters have less opportunity than other Alabamians to elect candidates of their choice to Congress.” Four sets of plaintiffs had filed lawsuits challenging Alabama’s new congressional districts for violating Section Two of the Voting Rights Act.[14]

The panel’s decision pushed back the deadline for U.S. House candidates to qualify to run from the state’s original deadline of January 28 to February 11. It also directed the state legislature to devise a congressional redistricting plan “that includes either an additional majority-Black congressional district, or an additional district in which Black voters otherwise have an opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.”[14]

The panel’s three judges were Senior Justice Stanley Marcus of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and District Court Justices Anna Manasco and Terry Moorer. Marcus was first appointed to a federal district court judgeship by President Ronald Reagan (R) in 1985 and to the 11th Circuit by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1997. Manasco and Moorer were appointed as federal judges by President Donald Trump (R) in 2020 and 2018, respectively.

In an email to media outlets on January 24, 2022, a spokesperson for Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall (R) wrote that, “The Attorney General’s Office strongly disagrees with the court’s decision and will be appealing in the coming days.”[15]

Thomas v. Merrill

On Nov. 15, 2021, James Thomas and three voters, Greater Birmingham Ministries, and the Alabama NAACP filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State John Merrill (R) and the House and Senate redistricting chairmen, Rep. Chris Pringle (R) and Sen. Jim McClendon (R).[16] Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama challenging the state House and Senate maps enacted on Nov. 4, 2021, by Gov. Kay Ivey (R). Plaintiffs alleged that 21 of the House districts and 11 of the Senate districts were racial gerrymanders in violation of the 14th Amendment.[17] As relief, plaintiffs asked the court to declare the maps unconstitutional and require legislators to develop new maps addressing the cited districts.[16]

  • View the plaintiffs' complaint here.

Milligan v. Merrill

On Nov. 15, 2021, Evan Milligan and four other voters, Greater Birmingham Ministries, and the Alabama NAACP filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State John Merrill (R) and the House and Senate redistricting chairmen, Rep. Chris Pringle (R) and Sen. Jim McClendon (R).[18] Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama challenging the congressional map enacted on Nov. 4, 2021, by Gov. Kay Ivey (R).[18] Plaintiffs alleged that the congressional map violated the Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment, saying the map packed Black voters into the 7th Congressional District and cracked Black voters among three other districts.[19] As relief, plaintiffs asked the court to invalidate the enacted congressional map and order a new map with instructions to include a second majority-Black district.[18]

  • View the plaintiffs' complaint here.

Caster v. Merrill

On Nov. 4, 2021, Marcus Caster and seven other Alabama voters filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State John Merrill (R) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama challenging the congressional map enacted on Nov. 4, 2021, by Gov. Kay Ivey (R).[20] In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the enacted congressional map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act "because it strategically cracks and packs Alabama's Black communities, diluting Black voting strength and confining Black voting power to one majority-Black district."[21] As relief, plaintiffs asked the court to invalidate the enacted congressional map and order a new map with instructions to include a second majority-Black district.[20] Following the filing of the plaintiffs' complaint, the case was transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.[20]

  • View the plaintiffs' complaint here.

Alabama NAACP v. Allen

On November 15, 2021, a group of voters and organizations sued the Alabama Secretary of State and members of the Alabama Legislature's redistricting committee, arguing that the state legislative maps enacted after the 2020 census were racial gerrymanders.[22] On August 22, 2025, the district court struck down the state senate map as a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.[23]

Background

Redistricting lawsuits, 2010-2020

In the aftermath of the 2010 redistricting cycles, several lawsuits bearing on the conduct of the 2020 redistricting cycle were decided by state and federal courts. Below are summaries of some of these lawsuits, listed in reverse chronological order.

Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek (2019)

See also: Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek

On June 27, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a joint ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, finding that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that fall beyond the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. The court ruled 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts penning the majority opinion, joined by Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. In the court's opinion, Roberts noted that the framers of the United States Constitution, "aware of electoral districting problems … [assigned] the issue to the state legislatures, expressly checked and balanced by the Federal Congress, with no suggestion that the federal courts had a role to play." He went on to say, "To hold that legislators cannot take their partisan interests into account when drawing district lines would essentially countermand the Framers' decision to entrust districting to political entities." Associate Justice Elena Kagan wrote the following in her dissent, which was joined by Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor: "The partisan gerrymanders in these cases deprived citizens of the most fundamental of their constitutional rights: the rights to participate equally in the political process, to join with others to advance political beliefs, and to choose their political representatives. In so doing, the partisan gerrymanders here debased and dishonored our democracy, turning upside-down the core American idea that all governmental power derives from the people." The court remanded both cases to their respective lower courts with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.[333]

Cooper v. Harris (2017)

See also: Cooper v. Harris

In Cooper v. Harris, decided on May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the judgment of the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, finding that two of North Carolina's congressional districts, the boundaries of which were set following the 2010 United States Census, had been subject to an illegal racial gerrymander, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the court's majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor (Thomas also filed a separate concurring opinion). In the court's majority opinion, Kagan described the two-part analysis utilized by the court when plaintiffs allege racial gerrymandering as follows: "First, the plaintiff must prove that 'race was the predominant factor motivating the legislature's decision to place a significant number of voters within or without a particular district.' ... Second, if racial considerations predominated over others, the design of the district must withstand strict scrutiny. The burden shifts to the State to prove that its race-based sorting of voters serves a 'compelling interest' and is 'narrowly tailored' to that end." In regard to the first part of the aforementioned analysis, Kagan went on to note that "a plaintiff succeeds at this stage even if the evidence reveals that a legislature elevated race to the predominant criterion in order to advance other goals, including political ones." Justice Samuel Alito delivered an opinion that concurred in part and dissented in part with the majority opinion. This opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy.[334][335][336]

Evenwel v. Abbott (2016)

See also: Evenwel v. Abbott

In Evenwel v. Abbott, decided on April 4, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 8-0 that a state or locality can use total population counts for redistricting purposes. The plaintiffs to the lawsuit, Sue Evenwel and Edward Pfenninger, had argued that district populations should take into account only the number of registered or eligible voters residing within those districts. Total population tallies, which have traditionally been used for redistricting purposes include non-voting residents, such as prisoners, children, and individuals residing in the country without legal authorization. The plaintiffs alleged that this tabulation method dilutes the voting power of citizens residing in districts that are home to smaller concentrations of non-voting residents. In Evenwel, the court unanimously rejected this argument. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the following in the court's opinion: "What constitutional history and our prior decisions strongly suggest, settled practice confirms. Adopting voter-eligible apportionment as constitutional command would upset a well-functioning approach to districting that all 50 states and countless local jurisdictions have followed for decades, even centuries. Appellants have shown no reason for the court to disturb this longstanding use of total population."[337][338][339][331]

Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2016)

See also: Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission

In Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, decided on June 29, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 that "redistricting is a legislative function, to be performed in accordance with the state's prescriptions for lawmaking, which may include the referendum and the governor's veto." At issue was the constitutionality of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, which was created via state constitutional amendment in 2000. According to Article 1, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, "the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof." State lawmakers had argued that the use of the word "legislature" in this context is literal; therefore, only a state legislature may draw congressional district lines. Meanwhile, the commission contended that the word "legislature" ought to be interpreted more broadly to mean "the legislative powers of the state," including voter initiatives and referenda. The court majority sided with the commission. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, wrote the following in the court's majority opinion: "The people of Arizona turned to the initiative to curb the practice of gerrymandering and, thereby, to ensure that Members of Congress would have 'an habitual recollection of their dependence on the people.' In so acting, Arizona voters sought to restore 'the core principle of republican government,' namely, 'that the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.' The Elections Clause does not hinder that endeavor." Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. In his dissent, Roberts argued that the word "legislature" in Article 1, Section 4, of the United States Constitution ought to be interpreted narrowly to mean the "representative body which makes the laws of the people."[331][340]

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Why does it matter?" accessed April 8, 2015
  2. ↑ Alabama Political Reporter, "Allen asks for redistricting case’s appeal back to SCOTUS," June 9, 2025
  3. ↑ Associated Press, "Alabama’s congressional map at stake in federal Voting Rights Act trial," February 10, 2025
  4. ↑ Alabama Reflector, "Federal court: Alabama Legislature intentionally discriminated against Black voters in redistricting," May 8, 2025
  5. ↑ Associated Press, "The Supreme Court will let Alabama’s congressional map be redrawn to better represent Black voters," September 26, 2023
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, "Milligan, et. al v. Allen, et. al," September 5, 2023
  7. ↑ USA Today, "Federal court smacks down Alabama congressional maps in showdown over Black voting power," September 5, 2023
  8. ↑ CNN, "Special master in Alabama redistricting case proposes three House maps in a closely watched voting rights fight," September 25, 2023
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 CNN, "Plaintiffs in high-profile redistricting case urge judges to toss out Alabama’s controversial congressional map," July 29, 2023
  10. ↑ United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Milligan v. Allen, July 28, 2023
  11. ↑ MSN, "Supreme Court rules in favor of Black voters in Alabama redistricting case," June 8, 2023
  12. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Merrill v. Milligan, February 7, 2022
  13. ↑ Montgomery Advertiser, "Federal court blocks Alabama's new congressional district map, saying it's not fair to Blacks," January 25, 2022
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 United States District Court Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division, Bobby Singleton, et al., and Evan Milligan, et al., v. John H. Merrill, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of Alabama, et al., January 24, 2022
  15. ↑ Associated Press, "Alabama’s new congressional districts map blocked by judges," January 25, 2022
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Democracy Docket, "Alabama Legislative Redistricting Challenge," accessed Nov. 18, 2021
  17. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Thomas complaint," Nov. 15, 2021
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Democracy Docket, "Alabama Congressional Redistricting Challenge (Milligan)," accessed Nov. 18, 2021
  19. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Milligan complaint," Nov. 15, 2021
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 Democracy Docket, "Alabama Congressional Redistricting Challenge (Caster)," accessed Nov. 18, 2021
  21. ↑ Democracy Docket," Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief," Nov. 4, 2021
  22. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Alabama NAACP v. Allen," accessed August 26, 2025
  23. ↑ Alabama Reflector, "Federal judge: Alabama Senate map violates Voting Rights Act," August 22, 2025
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Alaska Supreme Court, "In the Matter of the 2021 redistricting cases," April 21, 2023
  25. ↑ 25.00 25.01 25.02 25.03 25.04 25.05 25.06 25.07 25.08 25.09 25.10 25.11 25.12 25.13 25.14 25.15 25.16 25.17 25.18 25.19 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  26. ↑ Alaska Redistricting Board, "2023 Final Proclamation Packet, signed PDF," May 15, 2023
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 Alaska Supreme Court, "In the Matter of the 2021 Redistricting Cases," May 24, 2022
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Alaska Superior Court, Third Judicial District, "In the Matter of the 2021 Redistricting Plan," May 16, 2022
  29. ↑ Alaska Supreme Court, "In the Matter of the 2021 Redistricting Cases," March 25, 2022
  30. ↑ Alaska Superior Court, Third Judicial District, "In the Matter of the 2021 Redistricting Plan," February 15, 2022
  31. ↑ Alaska Redistricting Board, "Amend Presiding Judges' Statewide Consolidation and Venue Order," Dec. 14, 2021
  32. ↑ Democracy Docket, "City of Valdez v. Alaska Redistricting Board complaint," Dec. 10, 2021
  33. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Skagway v. Alaska Redistricting Board complaint," Dec. 10, 2021
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 Democracy Docket, "Calista Corp. v. Alaska Redistricting Board complaint," Dec. 10, 2021
  35. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Alaska Legislative Redistricting Challenge (Wilson)," accessed Dec. 15, 2021
  36. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Wilson v. Alaska Redistricting Board complaint," Dec. 9, 2021
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 Democracy Docket, "Complaint in the Nature of an Expedited Application to Compel Correction of Error in Redistricting Plan," Dec. 2, 2021
  38. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Arkansas Congressional Redistricting Challenge (Christian Ministerial Alliance)," accessed January 30, 2025
  39. ↑ Election Law Blog, "Divided 8th Circuit panel finds Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does not allow private plaintiffs to sue," November 20, 2023
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 Election Law Blog, "Divided 8th Circuit panel finds Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does not allow private plaintiffs to sue," November 20, 2023 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "dd" defined multiple times with different content
  41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Dec. 29, 2021
  42. ↑ Florida Politics, "Legal challenge to South Florida congressional and House districts moves forward," February 19, 2025
  43. ↑ United States District Court Southern District of Florida, "Case 1:24-cv-21983-JB, Document 88," accessed February 27, 2025
  44. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named marorder
  45. ↑ 45.0 45.1 45.2 The American Redistricting Project, "Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Inst., Inc. v. Lee," accessed May 11, 2022
  46. ↑ The American Redistricting Project," "Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief," accessed May 11, 2022
  47. ↑ Florida Politics, "Judge says Gov. DeSantis’ congressional map violates state constitution," May 11, 2022
  48. ↑ Florida Politics, "Florida officials appeal redistricting decision, putting judge’s call for a new map on hold," May 13, 2022
  49. ↑ News 4 Jax, "Judge lifts stay on Florida redistricting ruling," May 16, 2022
  50. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named fsc
  51. ↑ Florida Politics, "Appellate court strikes down decision to replace Gov. DeSantis’ congressional map," May 30, 2022
  52. ↑ In the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, In and for Leon County, Florida, "Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Inst., Inc., et al v. Byrd," October 27, 2022
  53. ↑ In the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, In and for Leon County, Florida, "Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Inst., Inc., et al v. Byrd," September 2, 2023
  54. ↑ In the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, In and for Leon County, Florida, "Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Inst., Inc., et al v. Byrd," September 4, 2023
  55. ↑ Florida Politics, "Florida appeals court ruling tossing congressional map," September 5, 2023
  56. ↑ CBS News, "Florida appeals court upholds congressional redistricting plan backed by Gov. Ron DeSantis," December 1, 2023
  57. ↑ Politico, "Florida’s high court poised to protect DeSantis’ congressional map that helps GOP," September 12, 2024
  58. ↑ Associated Press, "Florida congressional districts that eliminated a majority-Black seat upheld by state Supreme Court," July 17, 2025
  59. ↑ 59.0 59.1 Reuters, "US judge orders new congressional map in Georgia, citing harm to Black voters," October 27,, 2023
  60. ↑ 60.0 60.1 60.2 60.3 United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, "Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc., et al. v. Raffensperger," October 26, 2023
  61. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Georgia State Conf. of the NAACP v. Georgia," accessed October 27, 2023
  62. ↑ AP News, "A Georgia trial arguing redistricting harmed Black voters could decide control of a US House seat," September 4, 2023
  63. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Dec. 30, 2021
  64. ↑ 64.0 64.1 64.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named apacomp
  65. ↑ 65.0 65.1 65.2 AllOnGeorgia, "Secretary of State Raffensperger’s Response to Partisan Redistricting Lawsuits," Jan. 3, 2022
  66. ↑ 66.0 66.1 66.2 Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Jan. 7, 2022
  67. ↑ 67.0 67.1 67.2 67.3 Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Dec. 30, 2021
  68. ↑ 68.0 68.1 68.2 Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Jan. 11, 2022
  69. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Georgia Congressional Redistricting Challenge (Pendergrass)," accessed January 21, 2025
  70. ↑ 70.0 70.1 70.2 70.3 Democracy Docket, "Complaint," Dec. 30, 2021
  71. ↑ In the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii, "SCPW-22-0000078, Dkt. 1 PET," February 23, 2022
  72. ↑ In the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii, "SCPW-22-0000078, Dkt. 28 ORD," February 24, 2022
  73. ↑ In the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii, "SCPW-22-0000078, Dkt. 73 ODDP," March 16, 2022
  74. ↑ Associated Press, "Idaho Supreme Court consolidates redistricting map lawsuits," Nov. 26, 2021
  75. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Idaho Legislative Redistricting Challenge (Allan)," accessed Dec. 22, 2021
  76. ↑ 76.0 76.1 76.2 76.3 Democracy Docket, "Verified Petition for Review of the Idaho Commission for Reappoartionment's Plan L03 and for a Writ of Prohibition," Dec. 16, 2021
  77. ↑ The Associated Press, "Idaho’s new redistricting map faces second legal challenge," Nov. 18, 2021
  78. ↑ 78.0 78.1 78.2 Idaho Supreme Court, "Ada County petition," Nov. 17, 2021
  79. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Idaho Legislative Redistricting," accessed Nov. 18, 2021
  80. ↑ 80.0 80.1 Democracy Docket, "Durst petition," Nov. 10, 2021
  81. ↑ 81.0 81.1 81.2 Democracy Docket, "Verified Petition for Review," Dec. 15, 2021
  82. ↑ 82.0 82.1 82.2 82.3 Democracy Docket, "Petition Challenging Adopted Redistricting Plan L03," Dec. 1, 2021
  83. ↑ 83.0 83.1 Court Listenener, "Memorandum Opinion and Order," Oct. 19, 2021
  84. ↑ 84.0 84.1 Capitol News Illinois, "Pritzker signs revised state legislative maps," Sept. 24, 2021
  85. ↑ Politico, "Court puts Illinois legislative map on hold," Oct. 20, 2021
  86. ↑ Longview News-Journal, "Court upholds Illinois legislative redistricting plan," Jan. 4, 2021
  87. ↑ WGEM, "Illinois Republicans file lawsuit against new redistricting maps," accessed June 9, 2021
  88. ↑ 88.0 88.1 88.2 88.3 88.4 United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, "Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund v. Illinois State Board of Elections," accessed June 15, 2021
  89. ↑ The MALDEF filing was on behalf of five registered voters: Contreras, Fuentes, Martinez, Padilla, and Torres. Martinez later left the lawsuit.
  90. ↑ 90.0 90.1 Daily Herald, "Federal 3-judge panel to decide whether state redistricting plan is constitutional," accessed July 15, 2021
  91. ↑ 91.0 91.1 The State Journal-Register, "Illinois Democratic legislative leaders file motion to dismiss GOP redistricting lawsuit," accessed July 22, 2021
  92. ↑ The News Gazette, "Latino-rights group says Illinois' redrawn legislative maps still unfair," accessed September 2, 2021
  93. ↑ 93.0 93.1 93.2 Chicago Tribune, "Illinois Republicans sue in federal court to try to overturn Democratic-drawn legislative maps," accessed June 9, 2021
  94. ↑ 94.0 94.1 United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, "Durkin and McConchie v. Illinois State Board of Elections," accessed June 9, 2021
  95. ↑ Capitol News Illinois, "Plaintiffs: New legislative maps dilute Latino vote," Oct. 6, 2021
  96. ↑ 96.0 96.1 LawyersCommittee.org, "Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief," Oct. 15, 2021
  97. ↑ 97.0 97.1 Pacer Monitor, "United Congress of Community and Religious Organizations et al v. Illinois State Board of Elections et al," Oct. 20, 2021
  98. ↑ United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, "Case No. 1:21-cv-03091: Motion for Summary Judgment," accessed August 24, 2021
  99. ↑ Capitol News Illinois, "MALDEF amends redistricting complaint," accessed August 3, 2021
  100. ↑ gmtoday.com, "Another group challenges Illinois’ legislative maps," Oct. 13, 2021
  101. ↑ The Illinoize, "African American Group Asks Justice Department to Investigate Legislative Map," Oct. 11, 2021
  102. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Alonzo v. Schwab - Petition for Writ of Certiorari," November 23, 2022
  103. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Orders In Pending Cases," March 27, 2023
  104. ↑ CNN, "Supreme Court declines to hear Kansas racial gerrymandering case, leaves congressional map in force," March 27, 2023
  105. ↑ The Kansas City Star, "Kansas Supreme Court upholds congressional map that splits diverse Wyandotte County," May 18, 2022
  106. ↑ Kansas Supreme Court, Rivera, et al, Alonzo, et al, and Frick, et al v. Schwab, et al, June 21, 2022
  107. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Alonzo, et al. v. Schwab, et al.-Petition for a writ of certiorari," November 23, 2022
  108. ↑ 108.0 108.1 108.2 Wyandotte County District Court, Case No. 2022-CV-000089, April 25, 2022
  109. ↑ 109.0 109.1 The Topeka Capital-Journal, "A Wyandotte County judge strikes down Kansas Congressional map as unconstitutional in a historic ruling," April 25, 2022
  110. ↑ The Topeka Capital-Journal, "Attorneys lay out core arguments on Kansas redistricting as landmark trial nears its end," April 7, 2022
  111. ↑ Loud Light, "The Mission," accessed April 25, 2022
  112. ↑ Franklin Circuit Court, "Graham v. Adams," January 20, 2022
  113. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named LAscotusblog
  114. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named LAthearp
  115. ↑ Associated Press, "Supreme Court doesn’t rule on Louisiana’s second majority Black congressional district," June 27, 2025
  116. ↑ NPR, "Callais - 2024-04-30 Injunction and Reasons for Judgment," April 30, 2024
  117. ↑ NPR, "Judges block Louisiana's congressional map. A Supreme Court appeal is likely," April 30, 2024
  118. ↑ 4WWL, "AG Liz Murril says the Louisiana legislative maps case is now paused," August 14, 2025
  119. ↑ Louisiana Illuminator, "Louisiana’s legislative maps violate Voting Rights Act, 5th Circuit rules," August 14, 2025
  120. ↑ NOLA.com. "Louisiana must redraw its legislative districts, federal judge rules. Here's why." February 8, 2024
  121. ↑ 121.0 121.1 121.2 Twitter. "RedistrictNet," February 8, 2024
  122. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named apextend
  123. ↑ The New York Times, "Louisiana Must Finalize New Voting Map by January, Federal Appeals Court Says," November 10, 2023
  124. ↑ Democracy Docket, "United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - No. 22-30333," November 10, 2023
  125. ↑ The Washington Post, "Supreme Court agrees with delay on drawing new Louisiana congressional map," October 19, 2023
  126. ↑ Democracy Docket, "US Supreme Court Denies Petitioners in Louisiana Redistricting Case Emergency Relief," October 19, 2023
  127. ↑ 127.0 127.1 127.2 Supreme Court of the United States, "Certiorari -- Summary Dispositions," June 26, 2023
  128. ↑ 128.0 128.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "Ardoin, et al v. Robinson, et al.." June 28, 2022
  129. ↑ 129.0 129.1 The Daily Advertiser, "Federal judge will draw new Louisiana congressional map after Legislature fails to act," June 18, 2022
  130. ↑ Office of the Governor, State of Louisiana, "Gov. Edwards Issues Call for Special Session," June 7, 2022
  131. ↑ 131.0 131.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "Ardoin, et al vs. Robinson," June 17, 2022
  132. ↑ Bloomberg Government, "Order To Redo Louisiana Maps Temporarily Halted By Circuit Court," June 9, 2022
  133. ↑ 133.0 133.1 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, "Robinson, et al vs. Ardoin," June 12, 2022
  134. ↑ U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, "Robinson, et al vs. Ardoin," June 6, 2022
  135. ↑ 135.0 135.1 United States District Court Middle District of Louisiana, Robinson v. Ardoin, March 30, 2022
  136. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Petition," accessed April 18, 2022
  137. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "In re 2022 Legislative Districting," accessed April 18, 2022
  138. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Parrott v. Lamone," accessed March 25, 2022
  139. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Szeliga v. Lamone," accessed March 25, 2022
  140. ↑ Circuit Court of Maryland, "Neil Parrott, et al. vs. Linda Lamone, et al.," accessed March 25, 2022
  141. ↑ Maryland Circuit Court, "Memorandum Opinion and Order," accessed March 25, 2022
  142. ↑ Court of Appeals of Maryland, "IN THE MATTER OF 2022 LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTING OF THE STATE," February 11, 2022
  143. ↑ Court of Appeals of Maryland, "IN THE MATTER OF 2022 LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTING OF THE STATE," March 15, 2022
  144. ↑ 144.0 144.1 The American Redistricting Project, "Litigation - Agee v. Benson," January 8, 2024
  145. ↑ United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan Southern Division, "Case No. 1:22-cv-272 Donald Agee, Jr. v. Jocelyn Benson," December 21, 2023
  146. ↑ PacerMonitor, "Opinion and order," March 27, 2024
  147. ↑ CourtListener, "Opinion and order," July 26, 2024
  148. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court, "League of Women Voters of Michigan, et al v. Indep. Citizens Redistricting Commission," February 1, 2022
  149. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court, "League of Women Voters of Michigan, et al v. Indep. Citizens Redistricting Commission," March 25, 2022
  150. ↑ Detroit Free Press, "Michigan redistricting commission sued in anticipation of missing constitutional deadline," September 7, 2021
  151. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court, "Robert Davis v. Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission," September 16, 2021
  152. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court, "In re: Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission's duty to redraw districts by November 1, 2021: Petition for Relief," April 20, 2021
  153. ↑ The Detroit Free Press, "Redistricting commission makes case to Michigan Supreme Court for new timeline to draw maps," June 21, 2021
  154. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court, "In re: Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission's duty to redraw districts by November 1, 2021: Order," July 9, 2021
  155. ↑ 155.0 155.1 155.2 155.3 Ballot Access News, "Sixth Circuit Upholds Rules for Michigan’s Nonpartisan Redistricting Commission," May 27, 2021
  156. ↑ 156.0 156.1 156.2 156.3 United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, "Daunt v. Benson: Opinion," May 27, 2021
  157. ↑ 157.0 157.1 157.2 The American Redistricting Project, "Miss. State Conf. of the NAACP v. State Bd. of Elec. Commrs.," accessed December 22, 2022
  158. ↑ Associated Press, "Mississippi can wait to reset legislative districts that dilute Black voting strength, judges say," July 18, 2024
  159. ↑ Clarion Ledger, "Desoto County redistricting: MS election officials submit latest proposal. What to know," April 24, 2025
  160. ↑ Mississippi Today, "Federal court approves Mississippi legislative redistricting. Special elections will proceed," May 9, 2025
  161. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Norelli v. Scanlon," April 11, 2022
  162. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Norelli v. Scanlon," accessed April 12, 2022
  163. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named lawsuit
  164. ↑ NorthJersey.com, "Steinhardt c. New Jersey Redistricting Commission," accessed January 6, 2022
  165. ↑ New Jersey Globe, "N.J. Supreme Court dismisses GOP lawsuit on congressional redistricting," February 3, 2022
  166. ↑ 166.0 166.1 [Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Albany, Hoffmann, et al v. The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, et al, June 28, 2022]
  167. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Albany, Hoffmann, et al v. The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, et al, September 12, 2022
  168. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division: Third Judicial Department, Hoffmann, et al v. The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, et al, October 17, 2022
  169. ↑ Politico, "Mid-level court hands Democrats victory in New York redistricting case," July 13,, 2023
  170. ↑ Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, Hoffmann, et al v. The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, et al, July 13, 2023
  171. ↑ New York Daily News, "New York’s top court orders House map redrawn," December 12, 2023
  172. ↑ State of New York Court of Appeals, "Opinion No. 90, In the Matter of Anthony S. Hoffmann v. New York State Independent Redistricting Commission," December 12, 2023
  173. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York Nichols, et al v. Hochul, et al, May 15, 2022
  174. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County Nichols, et al v. Hochul, et al, May 25, 2022
  175. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Assemblyorder
  176. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "De Gaudemar v. Kosinski," accessed May 3, 2022
  177. ↑ Politico, "Judge mocks New York Democrats’ redistricting ‘Hail Mary’ case," May 4, 2022
  178. ↑ HudsonValley360, "Redistricting lawsuit unlikely to conclude before primaries," February 4, 2022
  179. ↑ 179.0 179.1 WETM, "Lawsuit out of Steuben County challenges New York redistricting map," February 3, 2022
  180. ↑ 180.0 180.1 180.2 New York Courts, "Decision and Order," March 31, 2022 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "order" defined multiple times with different content
  181. ↑ Newsday, "Appellate court stays ruling that threw out state's redistricting maps," April 4, 2022
  182. ↑ The New York Times, "Judge Keeps New York’s New Electoral Map Intact for Now," April 4, 2022
  183. ↑ Twitter, "Yancey Roy on April 8, 2022," accessed April 8, 2022
  184. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "Decision_Partially_Granting_Stay_4.8.22," accessed April 14, 2022
  185. ↑ Spectrum News 1, "Judge appoints special master as New York redistricting suit continues," April 18, 2021
  186. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Apr21ruling
  187. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named finalover
  188. ↑ Norwood News, "UPDATE Court Orders New May 20 Redistricting Map Deadline, Primary Election Postponed to August 23," May 2, 2022
  189. ↑ The City, "Special Master Carves Up New York’s Congressional Seats With a More Competitive Map," May 16, 2022
  190. ↑ Pix 11, "New York judge approves new maps for August primaries," May 21, 2022
  191. ↑ The Richmond Observer, "Lawmakers take N.C. congressional map dispute to U.S. Supreme Court," February 28, 2022
  192. ↑ Office of Tim Moore, "NCGA Files Application for Stay from the NC Supreme Court," February 25, 2022
  193. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Justices decline to reinstate GOP-backed congressional voting maps in North Carolina, Pennsylvania," March 7, 2022
  194. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Miscellaneous Order (03/07/2022)," March 7, 2022
  195. ↑ The Supreme Court of North Carolina, "Harper, et al. v. Hall, et al.," December 16, 2022
  196. ↑ The Carolina journal, "Legislative leaders ask NC Supreme Court to rehear redistricting case," January 20, 2023
  197. ↑ Politico, "North Carolina Supreme Court set to rehear election cases," February 6, 2023
  198. ↑ North Carolina Supreme Court, "Harper, et al. v. Hall, et al.," April 28, 2023
  199. ↑ 199.00 199.01 199.02 199.03 199.04 199.05 199.06 199.07 199.08 199.09 199.10 199.11 199.12 U.S. Supreme Court, “Moore, in his Official Capacity as Speaker of The North Carolina House of Representatives, et al. v. Harper et al.," "Certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina,” accessed June 16, 2023 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "ruling" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "ruling" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "ruling" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "ruling" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "ruling" defined multiple times with different content
  200. ↑ All About Redistricting, "NC League of Conservation Voters v. Hall," accessed December 9, 2021
  201. ↑ North Carolina Supreme Court, "Order," accessed December 9, 2021
  202. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order on Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction," December 3, 2021
  203. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order," December 6, 2021
  204. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order," December 6, 2021
  205. ↑ Fox 8, "North Carolina redistricting maps can stand, court rules, but appeals expected," January 11, 2022
  206. ↑ Politico, "North Carolina League of Conservation Voters, Common Cause, Harper v. Hall," accessed January 12, 2022
  207. ↑ WRAL, "Former judges chosen to review new election maps in NC redistricting case," February 16, 2022
  208. ↑ 208.0 208.1 The Charlotte Observer, "Order on Remedial Plans," February 23, 2022
  209. ↑ North Carolina Supreme Court, "Harper, et al. v. Hall, et al.," April 28, 2023
  210. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Voters Challenge Congressional Map in North Carolina," November 5, 2021
  211. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Supplemental Complaint," accessed November 16, 2021
  212. ↑ North Carolina Supreme Court, "Order," accessed December 9, 2021
  213. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order on Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction," December 3, 2021
  214. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order," December 6, 2021
  215. ↑ All About Redistricting, "Order," December 6, 2021
  216. ↑ Fox 8, "North Carolina redistricting maps can stand, court rules, but appeals expected," January 11, 2022
  217. ↑ Politico, "North Carolina League of Conservation Voters, Common Cause, Harper v. Hall," accessed January 12, 2022
  218. ↑ WRAL, "Former judges chosen to review new election maps in NC redistricting case," February 16, 2022
  219. ↑ WNCT, "Republicans respond after NC redistricting suit challenges lack of race data for maps," October 30, 2021
  220. ↑ Southern Coalition for Justice, "N.C. NAACP v. Berger," accessed November 5, 2021
  221. ↑ Democracy Docket, "North Carolina Legislative Redistricting Process," accessed February 17, 2022
  222. ↑ Democracy Docket, "SCOTUS Won’t Hear GOP Challenge to North Dakota Tribal Legislative Districts," January 13, 2025
  223. ↑ American Redistricting Project, "Walen v. Burgum," accessed January 16, 2024
  224. ↑ 224.0 224.1 North Dakota Monitor, "Supreme Court upholds North Dakota’s majority-Native legislative subdistricts," January 13, 2025
  225. ↑ United States District Court for the District of North Dakota, "Order on Motions for Summary Judgement," November 3, 2023
  226. ↑ 226.0 226.1 North Dakota Monitor, Appeals court rules against North Dakota tribes in voting rights case," May 14, 2025
  227. ↑ News From The States, "North Dakota legislative district map to remain in place for now, Supreme Court decides," July 16, 2025
  228. ↑ Twitter, "RedistrictNet," January 10, 2024
  229. ↑ Grand Forks Herald, "Native leaders, Democrats respond to North Dakota redistricting ruling," November 20, 2023
  230. ↑ Ohio Capital Journal, "New congressional suit challenges redistricting map," March 22, 2022
  231. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "Neiman v. LaRose," accessed March 22, 2022
  232. ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "Ohio Supreme Court won't review congressional map until after May 3 primary," March 29, 2022
  233. ↑ 233.0 233.1 233.2 The Columbus Dispatch, "Redistricting: Ohio Supreme Court rejects congressional map used in May, orders new one," July 19, 2022
  234. ↑ 234.0 234.1 234.2 Neiman, et al v. LaRose, et al," July 19, 2022
  235. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Order List (6/30/2023)," accessed September 8, 2023
  236. ↑ Democracy Docket, " Ohio Supreme Court Dismisses Lawsuits Over Congressional Map ," September 7, 2023
  237. ↑ The Columbus Dispatch, "Lawsuit asks federal judges to adopt legislative maps rejected by Ohio Supreme Court," February 18, 2022
  238. ↑ Cleveland.com, "Federal judge says he’s staying out of Ohio’s redistricting fight, for now," March 14, 2022
  239. ↑ Statehouse News Bureau, "Federal judges will review a challenge to Ohio's redistricting process," March 18, 2022
  240. ↑ The Columbus Dispatch, "With May 3 out for legislative candidates, judges weigh options for new primary date, map," March 30, 2022
  241. ↑ Spectrum News 1, "Federal court decides to not interfere with legislative map redistricting, yet," April 20, 2022
  242. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named fedord
  243. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Simon v. DeWine," November 30, 2021
  244. ↑ Cleveland.com, "Federal judge pauses federal redistricting lawsuit to await decision from Ohio Supreme Court," January 13, 2022
  245. ↑ 245.0 245.1 245.2 Court News Ohio, "Congressional Map Ruled Unconstitutional," January 14, 2022
  246. ↑ 246.0 246.1 246.2 246.3 Court News Ohio, "New Ohio Legislative District Maps Unconstitutional," January 12, 2022
  247. ↑ Crossroads Today, "Voter rights groups sue over Ohio GOP’s congressional map," December 2, 2021
  248. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "League of Women Voters of Ohio v. DeWine," accessed December 2, 2021
  249. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "Entry," December 6, 2021
  250. ↑ 250.0 250.1 250.2 250.3 Ohio Supreme Court, "SLIP OPINION NO. 2022-OHIO-89," accessed January 14, 2022
  251. ↑ 251.0 251.1 13ABC, "Ohio Supreme Court makes final judgement on Congressional map challenges," March 18, 2022
  252. ↑ The Columbus Dispatch, "Redistricting: Eric Holder-backed lawsuit challenges Ohio congressional map," November 22, 2021
  253. ↑ National Redistricting Action Fund, "Adams v. DeWine," accessed November 23, 2021
  254. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "Entry," December 3, 2021
  255. ↑ Ohio Capital Journal, "Ohio Supreme Court dismisses redistricting challenge, leaving Statehouse maps in place," November 28, 2023
  256. ↑ WOSU, "Third Lawsuit Filed Over Ohio's New Legislative Maps," September 28, 2021
  257. ↑ SCRIBD, "Ohio Organizing Collaborative, et al. v. Ohio Redistricting Commission, et al.," accessed September 28, 2021
  258. ↑ 258.0 258.1 258.2 258.3 258.4 258.5 Supreme Court of Ohio, "SLIP OPINION NO. 2022-OHIO-65," accessed January 13, 2022
  259. ↑ 259.0 259.1 259.2 Ohio Capital Journal, "Groups say Ohio legislative maps still violate constitution," January 27, 2022
  260. ↑ The Brennan Center for Justice, "OBJECTIONS OF PETITIONERS THE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE, ET AL.," January 25, 2022
  261. ↑ 261.0 261.1 261.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named cnoleg2
  262. ↑ 262.0 262.1 262.2 Ohio Capital Journal, "Redistricting commission punts again, defies court order," February 17, 2022
  263. ↑ 263.0 263.1 263.2 NBC 4i, "Ohio Redistricting Commission has until Wednesday to explain failure to draw maps," February 18, 2022
  264. ↑ 264.0 264.1 264.2 WDTN, "Redistricting Commission responds to Ohio Supreme Court over unfinished maps," February 23, 2022
  265. ↑ 265.0 265.1 265.2 Associated Press, "Ohio political mapmakers awaiting fate of high court meeting," February 25, 2022
  266. ↑ 266.0 266.1 266.2 ABC 13, "Ohio Supreme Court postpones contempt hearing for Redistricting Commission," February 25, 2022
  267. ↑ 267.0 267.1 267.2 Court News Ohio, "Third Attempt at State House and Senate Maps Unconstitutional," March 16, 2022
  268. ↑ 268.0 268.1 268.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named march28
  269. ↑ 269.0 269.1 269.2 Statehouse News Bureau, "Ohio Supreme Court rejects fourth set of state legislative district maps," April 14, 2022
  270. ↑ 270.0 270.1 270.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named redo
  271. ↑ 271.0 271.1 271.2 KSTP, "Ohio’s high court rejects latest GOP-drawn Statehouse maps," May 25, 2022
  272. ↑ Ohio Capital Journal, "Ohio Supreme Court dismisses redistricting challenge, leaving Statehouse maps in place," November 28, 2023
  273. ↑ 273.0 273.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named dddismiss
  274. ↑ Spectrum News 1, "Second lawsuit filed against Ohio Redistricting Commission," Sept 26, 2021
  275. ↑ SCRIBD, "Bennett OH 09 24 2021," accessed September 28, 2021
  276. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS," January 25, 2022
  277. ↑ Statehouse News Bureau, "Lawsuit Filed Over Ohio House, Senate Maps That Keep Republican Supermajorities," September 23, 2021
  278. ↑ ACLU Ohio, "ACLU OF OHIO, LWV-OHIO, AND APRI LAUNCH LEGAL CHALLENGE OVER OHIO PARTISAN GERRYMANDERING," September 23, 2021
  279. ↑ ACLU Ohio, "League of Women Voters of Ohio v. Ohio Redistricting Commission," accessed September 28, 2021
  280. ↑ Ohio Supreme Court, "PETITIONERS’ OBJECTION TO THE OHIO REDISTRICTING COMMISSION’S REVISED MAP," January 25, 2022
  281. ↑ United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, "Ohio v. Coggins: Complaint for Injunctive and Mandamus Relief," February 25, 2021
  282. ↑ United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, "Ohio v. Coggins: Entry and Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction," March 24, 2021
  283. ↑ Justia, "State of Ohio v. Gina Raimondo, No. 21-3294 (6th Cir. 2021)," accessed May 25, 2021
  284. ↑ Ballot Access News, "Sixth Circuit Sets Oral Argument in Ohio’s Case to Force Census Bureau to Furnish Data Sooner," May 8, 2021
  285. ↑ United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, "Ohio v. Raimondo: Per Curiam," May 18, 2021
  286. ↑ Office of the Attorney General of Ohio, "AG Yost Secures Victory for Ohioans in Settlement with Census Bureau Data Lawsuit," May 25, 2021
  287. ↑ U.S. Census Bureau, "U.S. Census Bureau Statement on Release of Legacy Format Summary Redistricting Data File," March 15, 2021
  288. ↑ The Redmond Spokesman, "New lawsuit challenges Oregon redistricting," October 27, 2021
  289. ↑ Democracy Docket, "Sheehan v. Oregon Legislative Assembly," accessed November 5, 2021
  290. ↑ OPB, "Oregon Supreme Court upholds new state House and Senate maps," November 22, 2021
  291. ↑ Google Scholar, "Sheehan v. Oregon Legislative Assembly," accessed December 15, 2021
  292. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of Oregon, "Oregon ex rel. Kotek v. Fagan: Memorandum in Support of Petition for a Preemptory Writ of Mandamus, and Appendix," March 10, 2021
  293. ↑ Supreme Court of the State of Oregon, "Oregon ex rel. Kotek v. Fagan: Opinion," April 9, 2021
  294. ↑ ABC 6, "Supreme Court asked to intervene in Pennsylvania congressional maps case," March 1, 2022
  295. ↑ Supreme Court, "Emergency Application to Justice Alito for Writ of Injunction," accessed March 2, 2022
  296. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Justices decline to reinstate GOP-backed congressional voting maps in North Carolina, Pennsylvania," March 7, 2022
  297. ↑ Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, "Carter v. Degraffenreid: Petition for Review Addressed to the Court's Original Jurisdiction," April 26, 2021
  298. ↑ U.S, Supreme Court, "Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP," May 23, 2024
  299. ↑ Politico, "Supreme Court to hear racial redistricting case from South Carolina," May 15, 2023
  300. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Alexander, et al. v. The South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, et al.," February 17, 2023
  301. ↑ 301.0 301.1 301.2 United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Columbia Division, "South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, et al. v. Alexander," January 6, 2023
  302. ↑ 302.0 302.1 United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Columbia Division, "South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, et al. v. Alexander," February 10, 2022
  303. ↑ WAVY, "ACLU announces it will sue South Carolina over ‘illegally gerrymandered’ redistricting maps," December 24, 2021
  304. ↑ The Hill, "ACLU, NAACP sue South Carolina over redistricting delay," October 12, 2021
  305. ↑ The Tennessean, "Judges rule Tennessee Senate map unconstitutional, order legislature to redraw by Jan. 31," November 22, 2023
  306. ↑ Nashville Banner, "Tennessee Supreme Court Hears Fight Over How Legislative Districts Were Drawn," October 4, 2024
  307. ↑ The Tennessean, "Gov. Bill Lee signs redistricting bills dividing Davidson County into three congressional districts," February 7, 2022
  308. ↑ The Tennessean, "Tennessee appeals redistricting ruling after judges block Senate map," April 7, 2021
  309. ↑ Texas Tribune, "Can Texas use its new congressional map for 2026? A trio of judges will decide.," September 29, 2025
  310. ↑ CNN, "DOJ sues Texas, saying GOP-approved redistricting maps discriminate against Latinos and Blacks," December 6, 2021
  311. ↑ Associated Press, "Justice Department sues Texas over new redistricting maps," December 6, 2021
  312. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named statelegtrial
  313. ↑ Newsweek, "Civil Rights Groups Sue Texas Governor Citing Voting Rights Act Violations," November 16, 2021
  314. ↑ Austin American-Statesman, "Texas Democrats allege discrimination, challenge redistricting measures in 3 new lawsuits," November 3, 2021
  315. ↑ United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, "MALC v. Texas," accessed November 4, 2021
  316. ↑ Travis County District Court, "MALC v. Texas," accessed November 4, 2021
  317. ↑ United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, "Powell v. Texas," accessed November 4, 2021
  318. ↑ Austin American-Statesman, "Voting rights lawsuit seeks to overturn Texas' new congressional districts," October 26, 2021
  319. ↑ The American Redistricting Project, "League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature," accessed August 26, 2025
  320. ↑ 320.0 320.1 Utah News Dispatch, "Judge orders Utah Legislature to draw new congressional maps," August 25, 2025
  321. ↑ 321.0 321.1 Associated Press, "Judge rules Utah’s congressional map must be redrawn for the 2026 elections," August 25, 2025
  322. ↑ New York Times, "Utah’s Gerrymandered House Map Ignored Voters’ Will, State Supreme Court Says," July 11, 2024
  323. ↑ KSL.com, "Utah Supreme Court rejects Legislature's request to stop redistricting," September 15, 2025
  324. ↑ 324.0 324.1 United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Thomas v. Beals, et al, June 8, 2022
  325. ↑ United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Thomas, et al v. Beals, et al, August 1, 2022
  326. ↑ 326.0 326.1 326.2 Washington State Standard, "Federal judge orders redrawing of Yakima Valley legislative district," August 10, 2023
  327. ↑ 327.0 327.1 U.S. District Court for the District of Washington at Seattle, "Case No. 3:22-cv-05035-RSL: Susan Soto Palmer v. Steven Hobbs," March 15, 2024
  328. ↑ Washington Coalition for Open Government, "Washington Coalition for Open Government v. Washington," accessed December 15, 2021
  329. ↑ Seattle Times, "Washington Supreme Court rejects redistricting lawsuits," January 6, 2021
  330. ↑ 330.0 330.1 Democracy Docket, "Wisconsin Legislative Redistricting Challenge (Clarke)," accessed January 2, 2024
  331. ↑ 331.0 331.1 331.2 Supreme Court of Wisconsin, "Case No. 2023AP1399-OA," accessed January 2, 2024 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "opinion" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "opinion" defined multiple times with different content
  332. ↑ 332.0 332.1 332.2 U.S. Supreme Court, Wisconsin Legislature v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, decided March 23, 2022
  333. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek: Opinion of the Court," June 27, 2019
  334. ↑ Election Law Blog, "Breaking: SCOTUS to Hear NC Racial Gerrymandering Case," accessed June 27, 2016
  335. ↑ Ballot Access News, "U.S. Supreme Court Accepts Another Racial Gerrymandering Case," accessed June 28, 2016
  336. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Cooper v. Harris: Decision," May 22, 2017
  337. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Evenwel v. Abbott," accessed May 27, 2015
  338. ↑ Supreme Court Brief, "Supreme Court Inadvertently Announces Argument Date in Voting Case," October 5, 2015
  339. ↑ Election Law Blog, "Supreme Court Inadvertently Announces Argument Date in Voting Case," October 5, 2015
  340. ↑ The New York Times, "Supreme Court Upholds Creation of Arizona Redistricting Commission," June 29, 2015
v • e
Redistricting after the 2020 census
State-by-state
Overviews
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Redistricting_lawsuits_in_the_2020_redistricting_cycle&oldid=10449897"