Supreme Court voting decision may not alter Georgia midterms. But 2028?

State officials and redistricting experts say it would be all but impossible to redraw Georgia’s congressional and legislative lines before this year’s elections.

Qualifying was weeks ago, early voting is already underway, ballots have been prepared and candidates for Georgia’s 14 congressional districts and 236 legislative seats are running in the May 19 primary under the current maps.

The more likely impact would come later. Some officials are already bracing for the possibility of a special legislative session later this year to craft new maps for 2028 while Republican Gov. Brian Kemp remains in office.

Prominent Republicans immediately celebrated the ruling as an opening. Lt. Gov. Burt Jones and billionaire Rick Jackson, leading contenders for governor, were among those who swiftly called for a special session to overhaul the lines. Georgia GOP chair Josh McKoon said new maps that “prioritize traditional redistricting principles” are needed.

A spokesman for Kemp said his office is “actively analyzing this ruling and its potential impacts, but cannot comment further at this time.”

Democrats, meanwhile, erupted in outrage.

“It’s potentially devastating. The Georgia House is on the precipice of flipping, and we were able to pick up multiple seats last cycle. Now any gains we have made could be undone,” Democratic state Rep. Saira Draper, one of her party’s voting rights experts, said in an interview.

Credit: Ben Gray for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Credit: Ben Gray for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The court’s 6-3 decision found Louisiana relied too heavily on race when it created a second majority-Black congressional district, weakening one of the central pillars of the Voting Rights Act. The court’s conservative majority said the map amounted to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

In a stinging rejoinder, the court’s three-member liberal minority warned the decision could gut Section 2 of the act, the provision long used to challenge maps in Georgia and other states with histories of racial discrimination that diluted Black voting power.

Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said for decades Georgia’s elected offices, from the local level to Congress, have been shaped by Section 2. She warned Georgia could be on the brink of “backpedaling all the way back to pre-Voting Rights Act-era of representation at all levels of government.”

Democrats said the ruling underscored the need for federal voting protections in the long-stalled bill named for Georgia civil rights leader John Lewis. The measure currently faces long odds in the GOP-controlled Congress.

Credit: Jenni Girtman

Credit: Jenni Girtman

U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock said Wednesday’s decision “marks a profound defeat for American democracy” and warned it could dilute the power of minority voters.

“We must restore the Voting Rights Act and ban gerrymandering,” he said. “Our democracy is on the line.”

Rahul Garabadu, who helped litigate a challenge to Georgia’s 2021 election overhaul, said the ruling means state lawmakers are “now free to draw maps that erase the electoral power of racial minorities.”

“State legislatures still have the power to stop this,” said Garabadu, now a Democratic candidate for Georgia Senate. “We can pass voting rights protections, draw fair maps and refuse to let Georgia become a place where the strength of your vote depends on the color of your skin.”

‘Could be erased’

The decision lands squarely in a simmering redistricting fight in Georgia.

In 2023, a federal judge found that Georgia’s congressional and legislative maps illegally diluted Black voting strength and ordered lawmakers to draw an additional majority-Black congressional district, two new majority-Black state Senate districts and five new majority-Black state House districts.

Lawmakers convened in a special session to redraw district lines in a way that preserved GOP majorities, including by overhauling Democratic-held territory in metro Atlanta.

Credit: TNS

Credit: TNS

A federal judge accepted the revised maps, even as critics argued they protected GOP power while doing the minimum required under the Voting Rights Act. An appeal currently sits before the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Now the legal foundation behind those court-ordered changes appears shakier. And legal observers say it’s possible federal judges order the issue to be revisited under the new guidelines outlined in the Supreme Court’s majority opinion.

If and when lines are redrawn, experts say U.S. Rep. Sanford Bishop, a long-serving Democrat who represents a mostly rural southwest Georgia district, could be the most imperiled U.S. House member in the state. His district includes Albany, Americus and portions of Macon and Columbus. Census records show it was 50% Black and 39% white as of 2023.

Bishop, who is a senior leader on agriculture issues on Capitol Hill, has held the seat for 34 years and has been able to fend off more spirited challenges from Republican opponents in recent years.

Anthony Michael Kreis, a constitutional law professor at Georgia State University, said the ripple effects could extend beyond congressional and legislative districts.

“The greatest impact for Georgia likely won’t be in congressional districts, but other state and local single member races for governing bodies like school boards or county commissions,” he said.

Democrats are now bracing for the potential aftershocks of the ruling. The party enters the midterm cycle keen to cut into the GOP’s 99-seat majority in the 180-member House.

Former U.N. Ambassador Andrew Young said in an interview he’s disappointed that the “Supreme Court doesn’t realize the effects of slavery and segregation over the last 200 years.” And he predicted fierce pushback from critics.

For Young, that warning is rooted in his life story. As one of Martin Luther King Jr.’s closest advisers during the marches and organizing campaigns that helped lead to passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he saw firsthand how hard-won those rights were — and how quickly they can come under threat.

“The way I see people responding, they’re not going to give up their rights,” he said. “I think it’ll sharpen the fight to protect those rights through other means. And what that will probably mean is more demonstrations, more boycotts — more tension in society.”

Staff writer Ernie Suggs contributed to this report.