More than a dozen Democratic attorneys general are getting involved in a legal dispute in Georgia regarding its congressional map, claiming it discriminates against minority voters. The challenge brought by groups such as the ACLU and individual voters alleges that the new congressional map drawn by Georgia lawmakers after the 2020 census dilutes the power of Black voters by not creating new Black-majority districts to reflect the growth of the Black population in metro areas of the state. California Attorney General Rob Bonta and 18 of his colleagues filed an amicus brief arguing that Georgia’s maps are “diluting minority voting strength.”
However, election watchdog groups criticize the involvement of blue states like California in Georgia’s legal battle, calling it “transparently political.” The Honest Elections Project Vice President Chad Ennis stated that the left’s defense in redistricting cases is often to claim that any map not in favor of Democrats is racist. Despite a federal judge ruling that Georgia had complied with the court’s order to include a majority or near-majority Black district, the ACLU argued that the state was still violating the Voting Rights Act by dismantling a nearby district of mostly minority voters to create a majority-Black district in Atlanta.
The ACLU asserts that the new map in Georgia still violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits any voting qualification or practice that denies or abridges the right to vote based on race or color. California Attorney General Bonta’s office stated that the amicus brief from blue states emphasizes the importance of civic engagement for all voters, regardless of race or background. Bonta stressed that the Fifteenth Amendment guarantees all U.S. citizens the right to vote, but he criticized those who seek to win by denying access to and suppressing voters.
The Honest Elections Project criticized Democratic state prosecutors for ignoring minority districts when it benefits the Left politically and pointed to a recent court battle in Michigan where state House and Senate maps were tossed as racial gerrymanders. The three-judge federal panel ruled that Michigan’s Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission had illegally drawn district lines that predominantly focused on race, minimizing Black voting age population in Detroit-area districts. Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia attorney general and head of the Election Transparency Initiative, noted that the involvement of Democrat AGs in Georgia’s case is political and rare in election litigation related to another state.
Overall, the involvement of Democratic attorneys general in the legal dispute over Georgia’s congressional map showcases the ongoing battle over redistricting and voting rights in the United States. While Democrats argue that the maps in Georgia dilute minority voting strength, critics claim that their intervention is politically motivated and overlooks similar issues in states where the Left benefits. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for future redistricting efforts and the protection of voting rights for minority populations.
