Allen v. Milligan (Formerly Merrill v. Milligan)

In November 2021, groups of individual Black voters and Black-led community and civil rights organizations filed two lawsuits alleging that Alabama’s new congressional map was designed to dilute Black Alabamans’ votes: Caster v. Merrill and Milligan v. Merrill. The lawsuits argued that the map inten­tion­ally perpetu­ates a long history of discrim­in­a­tion against Black voters by pack­ing a large segment of Black voters into a single heav­ily Black congres­sional district and crack­ing the remain­ing voters among multiple districts dominated by white voters, thereby dilut­ing Black polit­ical power. Under the map, Black voters have the oppor­tun­ity to elect a candid­ate of choice in only one of seven districts (14 percent of districts) despite making up around 27 percent of the state’s voting age popu­la­tion.

On Janu­ary 24, 2022, the district court hearing the cases prelim­in­ar­ily blocked Alabama’s new congres­sional map, find­ing that the map was substan­tially likely to viol­ate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and ordered the Alabama legislature to create a second Black oppor­tun­ity district in time for the 2022 midterms. 

However, Alabama appealed the decision, and, on February 7, 2022, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and stayed the lower court’s judg­ments pending appeal.

On July 18, 2022, the Brennan Center in partnership with pro bono counsel Debevoise & Plimpton filed an amicus brief in support of the appellees and respondents urging the court to uphold the lower court’s decision finding that Alabama’s map did indeed violate Section 2.

The brief argues that far from imposing a mandate to draw majority-minority districts whenever a minority group is large enough, Section 2 is a well-calibrated test that targets serious cases of actual discrimination in line-drawing.

The brief also argues that the Gingles framework developed by courts gives states multiple ways to create electoral districts that comply with Section 2 other than creating majority-minority districts. Furthermore, it discusses how the Gingles framework contains multiple built-in safeguards that prevent improper overuse of race in redistricting.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on October 4, 2022. 

• Lower Court Order Granting Caster Plaintiffs’ Request for a Preliminary Injunction (January 24, 2022)
• Three-Judge Panel Order and Memorandum Opinion in Favor of Milligan Plaintiffs (January 24, 2022)
• Supreme Court Order Granting Stay and Dissents (February 7, 2022)
• Brief for the State of Alabama (April 25, 2022)
• Brief for Milligan Appellees (July 11, 2022)
• Brief for Caster Respondents (July 11, 2022)
• Reply Brief for the State of Alabama (August 24, 2022)
• Supreme Court Oral Arguments (October 4, 2022)
• Allen v. Milligan Supreme Court Opinion (June 8, 2023)
• Comments on Remedial Proposal (September 14, 2023)
• Amicus Brief on Remedial Maps (September 28, 2023)

Read our Annotated Guide to the Amicus Briefs in Merrill v. Milligan.

• Brief of the United States in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the Leadership Conference Education Fund, and Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Support of Plaintiffs 
• Brief of Voting Rights Practitioners in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of American Bar Association in Support of Plaintiffs 
• Brief of Bipartisan Former Congressmembers in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Law Professor Travis Crum in Support of Plaintiffs 
• Brief of Constitutional Accountability Center in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of 20 States and the District of Columbia in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Republican Former Governors in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Local Governments in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Law Professors and Political Scientists in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Project on Fair Representation in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Campaign Legal Center in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Computational Redistricting Experts in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Republican State Legislators in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Lawyers Democracy Fund in Support of Alabama
• Brief of U.W. Clemon, Fred Gray, Henry Sanders, Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, and Scholars of the Political Impacts of Slavery in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Historians in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Southern Poverty Law Center, League of Women Voters, and Stand-Up Mobile in Support of Plaintiffs 
• Brief of Coastal Alabama Partnership in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Fair Housing Centers in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, and Presidential Coalition in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Representatives Sewell, Beatty, Meeks, and Butterfield in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of National Congress of American Indians in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of UCLA Social Scientists in Support of Plaintiffs
• Brief of Alabama Center for Law and Liberty in Support of Alabama
• Brief of 14 States in Support of Alabama
• Brief of America First Legal in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Republican National Committee in Support of Alabama
• Brief of National Republican Redistricting Trust in Support of Alabama
• Brief of American Legislative Exchange Council in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Alabama GOP Chairman in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Singleton Plaintiffs in Support of Neither Party
• Brief of Individual Voters, NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Power Coalition for Equity in Support for Plaintiffs
• Brief of Representatives Carl Jr., Moore, Rogers, Aderholt, and Palmer in Support of Alabama
• Brief of Public Interest Legal Foundation in Support of Alabama