The court’s panel determined that political motivations, not racial ones, were behind the redraw.
A panel of judges from the Middle Tennessee District Court determined that Tennessee may use its newly redistricted congressional map for the primaries that will be conducted next month. The judges, who refused to issue a preliminary injunction, found that political motivations were behind the redrawn maps rather than racial discrimination, as the lawsuit claimed.
The judges cited Supreme Court precedent in Louisiana v. Callais, which “emphasized that plaintiffs challenging legislative districts on racial grounds must ‘rul[e] out the competing explanation that political consideratoin dominated the legislature’s redistricting efforts,’ and that ‘if either politics or race could explain a district’s contours,’ Plaintiffs lose.”
“Plaintiffs may suffer some harm—lower odds of electing the congressional candidates of their choosing. But because Plaintiffs sued government officials, the ‘irreparable harm’ suffered by Tennessee merges with the ‘public interest’ factor,” the court continued. “The public is better served by a map created by its elected representatives, not forced upon them by unelected judges.”
As the Lord Leads, Pray with Us…
- For federal judges as they head challenges to state legislators’ election-related actions and redistricting efforts.
- For prudence for state legislatures as they evaluate their election laws and congressional representation.
Sources: WSMV 4, UPI News
