Originally published in The Bulwark on June 26, 2026.
HERE’S A PUZZLE. On May 26, a three-judge federal panel concluded that Alabama’s congressional map intentionally discriminated against black voters. A week later, the Supreme Court allowed the map to remain in place.
The speed of the reversal was striking. So was the reasoning. The “stay” in Alabama put a fine point on a newly dominant line of reasoning coming from the Supreme Court. Relying on its recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais, the Court majority’s unsigned order suggested that the constitutional problem was not Alabama’s failure to remedy racial inequality, but the extent to which race had been used in efforts (particularly by the District Court) to do so. Taken together, Callais and the Alabama stay reveal something important about the Supreme Court’s current tactics. They also help clarify the nature of the Court’s growing threat to American democracy.