Allen v. Milligan · ¶30

To prevail on their Fourteenth Amendment challenge, plaintiffs were required to show that Alabama enacted the 2023 Redistricting Plan “ `as a purposeful device to minimize or cancel out the voting potential of racial or ethnic minorities.' ” Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, 602 U. S. 1, 38 (2024) (quoting Miller v. John son, 515 U. S. 900, 911 (1995)). That claim has two elements: discriminatory effect and discriminatory purpose. Alexan der, 602 U. S., at 39. Alabama has not shown that the District Court erred on either element.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.