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 determination that Alabama's congressional districting map likely violates 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 minority voting strength. The decision emphasizes the importance of adhering to traditional districting criteria while ensuring equal access to the political process for minority voters.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Allen v. Milligan.
The Court held that the plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that Alabama's districting map violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
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 challenges under the Equal Protection Clause regarding racial gerrymandering and vote dilution.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Singleton plaintiffs...amended their complaint to challenge HB1 as an impermissible racial gerrymander under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
Why Voting Rights is relevant to Allen v. Milligan
The case directly concerns the interpretation and application of the Voting Rights Act, which is grounded in constitutional voting rights protections.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)These cases concern Section 2 of that Act...The Act 'create[d] stringent new remedies for voting discrimination.'
-
Why Substantive Due Process is relevant to Allen v. Milligan
The case involves the substantive evaluation of whether the political process is equally open to minority voters, which relates to substantive due process considerations.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The totality of circumstances inquiry recognizes that application of the Gingles factors is 'peculiarly dependent upon the facts of each case.'
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 concluded in a 227-page opinion that the question whether HB1 likely violated § 2 was not 'a close one.'
The Court declines to remake its § 2 jurisprudence in line with Alabama's 'race-neutral benchmark' theory.
