Allen v. Milligan
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Allen v. Milligan and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Allen v. Milligan.
The Supreme Court affirmed the District Court's decision that Alabama's congressional redistricting map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Court found that the plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success in showing that the map diluted black voting strength. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to traditional districting criteria and the need for a race-neutral benchmark in evaluating such claims.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Allen v. Milligan.
The Court held that the District Court's determination that plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that HB1 violates Section 2 was correct.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Allen v. Milligan. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Equal Protection is relevant to Allen v. Milligan
The case involves claims under the Equal Protection Clause regarding racial gerrymandering.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Singleton plaintiffs...amended their complaint to challenge HB1 as a racial gerrymander under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
Why Voting Rights is relevant to Allen v. Milligan
The case primarily concerns the application of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which is designed to protect voting rights.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Court affrms the District Court's determination that plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that HB1 violates § 2.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Allen v. Milligan
The case involves the allocation of authority between state districting decisions and federal oversight under the Voting Rights Act.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Reapportionment, we have repeatedly observed, 'is primarily the duty and responsibility of the State[s], not the federal courts.'
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Allen v. Milligan that support the summary and concepts above.
The Court affirms the District Court's determination that plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that HB1 violates § 2.
The District Court faithfully applied this Court's precedents in concluding that HB1 likely violates § 2.
Section 2 requires political processes in a State to be 'equally open' such that minority voters do not 'have less opportunity than other members of the electorate.'