Let’s be clear about what happened last night, because the language of the law has a way of turning grand theft into a procedural footnote. The Supreme Court of the United States - six conservatives, all of them appointed by Republican presidents, three of them by a man who still can’t stop whining about losing an election he lost 6 years ago - handed the state of Alabama permission to use a congressional map that a federal district court had already ruled was the product of intentional racial discrimination. Not suspected discrimination. Not alleged discrimination. Intentional racial discrimination. And SCROTUS said: go ahead, use it anyway.
The vote was 6–3. The three liberal justices dissented. If you’re keeping score at home, that’s every single conservative justice voting to allow a map that eliminates one of Alabama’s two majority-Black congressional districts, in a state where Black residents make up more than a quarter of the population - just in time for the 2026 midterms. Representative Shomari Figures, currently holding the 2nd District seat as a Democrat, is now widely expected to lose that seat to a Republican when the new map goes into effect. One seat. Right there. Gone. The House is currently split 220 Republicans to 213 Democrats. You do the math.
The majority’s written reasoning is worth reading if you enjoy watching people pretend they’re not doing the thing they’re very clearly doing. The justices said the district court “interposed itself” into Alabama’s elections. The district court, in case you missed it, was the court that found the map was the result of intentional racial discrimination. The justices said the lower court was wrong to think it knew better than Alabama’s elected representatives. Alabama’s elected representatives are the ones who drew the discriminatory map. This is not a paradox to these six people. This is a legal argument.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall called it “a major victory for Alabama and for the principle of self-governance.” Governor Kay Ivey said Alabama knows its people and its districts best. What they both mean, and what they will never say out loud, is that Alabama knows exactly how to dilute the political power of Black voters without technically calling it that. They have been practicing since 1965. The Voting Rights Act was supposed to stop them. The Supreme Court is in the process of making sure it can’t.
This ruling doesn’t come out of nowhere. It comes five weeks after the same six justices gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais… a 6–3 decision authored by Samuel Alito that the Campaign Legal Center called one of the most consequential setbacks for multiracial democracy in a generation. Section 2 is the provision that lets voters go to court when a voting map dilutes their representation on the basis of race. It has been the backbone of federal voting rights enforcement for sixty years. It is now, as the League of Women Voters put it in blunt institutional language, weakened to the point of inoperability. The Callais ruling cleared the way for states to use partisan gerrymandering as a wholesale excuse to deny Black voters a voice in their government… and within weeks, that’s precisely what they did.
The timeline in Alabama alone is a case study in what bureaucratic contempt looks like when it has a Supreme Court to run interference. After the 2020 census, the Republican-controlled Alabama legislature drew a map with one majority-Black district out of seven, despite Black residents comprising 27 percent of the state’s population. Federal courts blocked it. Alabama drew a replacement map in 2023 — still with only one majority-Black district. Federal courts blocked that too, calling it a clear violation of the Voting Rights Act. In 2025, after a full trial, a district court went further and found the map wasn’t just a legal violation, it was evidence of intentional racial discrimination under the Constitution itself. The judges wrote that they “cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.” Then SCROTUS wiped out that ruling, sent the case back down using Callais as the wrecking ball, and when the lower court still said no, the six conservatives stepped in last night and said yes.
Two of the Alabama judges who blocked the discriminatory map were appointed by Donald Trump. When Trump’s own judges look at a map and say this is unconstitutional racial discrimination, and SCROTUS overrules them to let the discrimination stand, we are no longer having an abstract conversation about jurisprudence. We are watching power protect itself.
And Alabama is not alone. It is the latest domino in a redistricting frenzy that Democracy Docket has described as part of a broader push to maintain Republican control of the House of Representatives ahead of November. Trump personally ordered Texas Governor Greg Abbott to redraw the state’s congressional map in July 2025, telling CNBC that Texas owed Republicans five more seats. “We are entitled to five more seats,” he said. He posted on Truth Social that if Republicans gerrymandered more favorable maps and eliminated mail voting and paper ballots, it would “erase Democrats’ chances.” He called it the way to end “the CROOKED game of politics.” The game of politics he considers crooked, you’ll note, is the one where voters get to choose their representatives. North Carolina passed new maps targeting a Democratic-held seat. Missouri did the same. The Texas map was allowed to stand by SCROTUS despite a lower court finding it was likely an illegal racial gerrymander. Florida is about to have its own redistricting special session. The pattern is not subtle. The man behind it is not subtle. He keeps saying exactly what he’s doing and we keep being asked to act like he didn’t say it.
All of this, understand, is happening in the context of the same man screaming since November 2020 that American elections cannot be trusted. The fraud claims. The stolen election. The rigged machines. The corrupted mail ballots. Since that night, Trump and his allies filed 62 lawsuits challenging the 2020 results. They won one. One minor case in Pennsylvania that had no effect on the outcome in that state. Sixty-one courts, including courts with judges appointed by Trump himself, heard the evidence… or more accurately, watched the Trump legal team fail to present any evidence - and ruled against him. Thirty of those cases were decided on the merits after full hearings. In 2022, eight prominent conservatives - former Republican senators, former federal judges, senior Republican officials - published a 72-page report reviewing all 64 related cases and concluded that Trump and his allies “simply didn’t provide evidence of widespread election fraud.” They found not a single instance of fraud large enough to change the result of even one precinct. Not one precinct. The current Justice Department has spent months pursuing Trump’s 2020 fraud fixations and has produced no evidence of widespread fraud. Their most visible prosecutions have involved one or two individuals. The fraud is not there. It was never there. It has been looked for, exhaustively, by Trump’s own people, and it is not there.
And yet. The infrastructure being built right now is built entirely on the premise that it is. The SAVE Act - the irony deficient acronym for the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act - passed the House 220 to 208 and is awaiting a Senate vote. It would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections: a passport, a birth certificate, a specific type of driver’s license that most Americans don’t have. A “Real ID” does not prove citizenship. Utah reviewed its entire voter registration list in January 2026. More than two million registered voters. They found one instance of noncitizen registration. Zero instances of a noncitizen actually casting a vote. One registration. Out of two million. The problem the SAVE Act is solving does not exist. What the SAVE Act would solve is a different problem entirely: the problem of poor people, young people, renters, and people of color being able to register and vote without producing paperwork they often don’t have on hand. The bill would also mandate monthly voter roll purges, virtually guaranteeing that eligible voters get knocked off the rolls right before Election Day and have no time to correct it.
Then there’s the DOJ’s sprawling effort to obtain voter registration files from nearly every state, using a federal immigration database tool called SAVE - another absolute trumpshit acronym for the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements - which has a documented tendency to produce false positives. Protect Democracy has laid out the three likely outcomes of this exercise with clinical precision: purges of eligible voters, potential election subversion in 2026, and an unprecedented invasion of private voter data. The administration has already conceded that DOGE operatives within the Social Security Administration agreed to hand state voter rolls over to an outside advocacy group seeking to find evidence of fraud and, in their own words, overturn election results in certain states. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a concession made by the administration itself.
And then there’s the mail ballot executive order. Trump has vowed to end mail-in voting before November 2026, calling it corrupt, calling voting machines highly inaccurate, posting that Republicans “must get behind” eliminating both if they want to retain power. Federal elections are administered by states. Constitutional law experts have been unanimous that the president lacks the authority to unilaterally eliminate mail voting. This has not stopped the executive order from being drafted. Legal challenges are coming. The chaos, however, is already here, and chaos is part of the strategy. Five states will have show-your-papers citizenship requirements for the 2026 midterms: Arizona, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. In New Hampshire, the proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration has already produced widespread confusion, with some eligible voters unable to register because they lacked a marriage certificate reflecting a name change, or didn’t have the right combination of documents. Eligible American citizens, unable to vote. That’s the result. That’s the point.
The through-line is not complicated. A man who lost an election spent four years insisting the election was stolen. Sixty-one courts disagreed. A bipartisan group of conservative legal experts disagreed. His own appointed judges disagreed. His own Justice Department, investigating his own fraud claims in 2025 and 2026, has found nothing. He has responded to this by systematically dismantling every mechanism by which the people whose votes he didn’t get can exercise electoral power: redrawing their districts, diluting their representation, purging their voter rolls, demanding their documents, eliminating their most accessible method of voting, and installing six justices on the Supreme Court who will bless each of these actions with the imprimatur of legality while insisting, with straight faces, that they are not doing what they are doing.
The district court judges who blocked Alabama’s map wrote that they could not require Alabamians to vote under a plan tainted by intentional racial discrimination. SCROTUS’s answer, delivered last night in six-to-three, is: yes you can. Yes they can. And they will.
Shomari Figures will almost certainly lose his seat. A Republican will almost certainly take it. The House majority will almost certainly hold, not because of what voters chose, but because of what the map decided before anyone voted. This is what it looks like when a system designed to count votes is repurposed, piece by piece, to discount them.
The blueprint was always real. The execution is now underway. The Supreme Court is on the construction crew. The clock on democracy is running out, a 250 year experiment is coming to an end…
**If this publication matters to you, keep it going. We don’t run ads, we don’t take corporate money, and we don’t pull punches. If you want more of this, you can support Unfugginbelievable directly at buymeacoffee.com/unfugginbelievable. Every cup keeps the lights on and the righteous indignation fully caffeinated.
Add comment
Comments