The Election Law Clinic, along with Fair Districts GA, filed a friends of the court brief in support of Plaintiffs in Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity v. Raffensperger to demonstrate that it is not hard to draw Georgia districts that respect the legislature’s discretionary choices while complying with the Voting Rights Act. On February 8, 2022, the motion to file the friends of the court brief was granted. On March 1, 2022, the federal court denied the preliminary injunction but noted the proposed maps likely violate the Voting Rights Act.

BACKGROUND

The Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, the Sixth District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, and individual voters filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the State’s newly drawn state legislative districts, which deny Black voters an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.

Plaintiffs in Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity v. Raffensperger argue that the Georgia General Assembly violated the Voting Rights Act by not drawing sufficient districts to protect Black voters’ opportunity to elect their candidates of choice. Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction against the use of the new districts in the 2022 elections. As required by Supreme Court precedent, Plaintiffs provided illustrative House and Senate plans to demonstrate that it was possible (and therefore necessary) to draw the additional districts. In response, the Georgia Secretary of State argued that Plaintiffs’ illustrative maps cannot serve as a remedy because they “differ [too much] from those adopted by the legislature.”

ELC and Fair Districts GA reminded the Court that, at the liability stage, it need only consider whether it can fashion a permissible remedy, not whether Plaintiffs’ illustrative maps would be a proper remedy. Amici used publicly available algorithms to show the Court that it would take only days to create thousands of plans that both reflect the legislature’s discretionary choices and include the additional majority-Black districts.

Amici reminded the court that, at the liability stage, the court need only consider whether it can fashion a permissible remedy, not whether Plaintiff’s demonstrative maps serve as a proper remedy. To alleviate the concern of whether a proper remedy could be drawn, amici used publicly available algorithms to show the court that it would take only days to create thousands of plans that both reflect the legislature’s discretionary choices and include the additional Black-majority districts.  

Christopher T. Kenny, ELC’s pre-doctoral fellow, simulated five thousand district maps for each of the state House and Senate. He used an algorithm that forms new districts based on contiguity, population, compactness, and administrative boundaries, and encourages similarity to the legislature’s enacted plan.

The plans he generated keep an average of 85.4% of Georgians in the same House district and an average of 76.2% of Georgians in the same Senate district. The simulated plans are also comparable to the enacted plans on the metrics the legislature prioritized—and in some cases beat the enacted plans on those metrics, all while matching the Plaintiffs’ illustrative plan in terms of the number of majority-Black districts.

As a result, amici sought to assure the Court that it could easily remedy the alleged Voting Rights Act violations while respecting the General Assembly’s discretionary choices.