In May 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision upholding a partisan gerrymander of South Carolina's formerly highly competitive First Congressional District that packed black voters into the Sixth District. The ruling in Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP harms nonwhite voters' ability to elect a representative of their choice. There's only one minority-majority district in South Carolina out of seven total districts, although there are enough black voters in the state to warrant two. With a Cook PVI of R+7, South Carolina's long history of racially polarized voting and the fact that most racial minority voters vote Democratic, racial minorities in the First District have a steep hill to climb to defeat Nancy Mace and elect a representative of their choice. Arkansawyers face a similar situation in the Second Congressional District, which has a Cook PVI of R+9 and is the least Republican-leaning of the three districts with a piece of Little Rock. We cannot afford to stand by and allow the same outcome in Arkansas's redistricting case! Putting all of Little Rock in a single very compact district instead of cracking it into three isn't the only solution; the Supreme Court's precedent in Allen v. Milligan could actually warrant packing nonwhite Little Rockers and voters from further south and east in the state into a single minority-majority district that's even more favorable to electing a representative of their choice.

If Arkansas's existing Congressional map is allowed to be used in the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections, nonwhite Arkansawyers will continue to have inadequate representation in Congress on issues disproportionately affecting them like economics, education, environmental policy and reproductive rights. Four likely or safely Republican districts also silences the 50% of Arkansawyers closest to the political center and everyone from the Democratic Party because the Republican Party's candidates only need to appeal to the most far-right 25% of Arkansawyers to win the nomination and can cruise to victory in the general election unless there's a serious scandal or an unusually strong opponent in an unusually unfavorable national environment. The arguments against gerrymandering aren't always political, but the arguments for it are.

Enough is enough. The precedent in Allen v. Milligan requires a proportional number of minority-majority districts "or something quite close to it" to be drawn if at all possible. Alabama failed to draw a Black-plurality district alongside their preexisting Black-majority district and had one enacted due to a court order. Louisiana also got a second Black-majority district due to a court order. The Supreme Court is now evaluating whether a non-compact minority-majority district drawn to ensure proportional representation constitutes an illegal racial gerrymander or not, but one the two maps I drew for Arkansas doesn't have an especially elongated shape like Louisiana's new minority-majority district does. The Supreme Court also ruled against nonwhite South Carolinians in part due to their failure to present a potentially compliant alternative map. It's time for Arkansawyers to present (a) compliant map(s) in court and demand an actual minority-majority district be drawn rather than simply centering a district on Little Rock. I drew up two separate maps on Dave's Redistricting Atlas.

AR Minority map one turns the First Congressional District along Arkansas's eastern border into a likely Democratic minority-majority district including the minority-majority areas of Little Rock where over 40% of the voting age population is black. It's not compact, but it is a solution. https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::236df385-ec75-462a-8b3a-b9237f01e6d7

The AR Minority #2 map also alters the First Congressional District to pack as many racial minority voters in Little Rock and the Gulf Coastal Plain as possible to ensure they have adequate representation. It's more compact than the first map, but unfortunately, Donald Trump would've narrowly won the district in 2020 despite being minority-majority and over 40% black. Nonetheless, Hillary Clinton won it in 2016, and averaging out the two-party presidential vote from those two elections in the proposed First District would lead to a net 50.01% D/49.99% R district. A highly competitive minority-majority district would still give black Arkansawyers more than a remote chance of electing a representative of their choice; a conservative nonwhite Democrat like Alaska's Mary Peltola or Southwest Washington's Marie Perez could be a good fit for such a district even if Donald Trump narrowly wins it again in 2024. A lot of politics is still local, and Arkansas is simply one of the most conservative states even in urban and nonwhite environments; representatives are supposed to represent their constituents, and a highly competitive minority-majority district would still help achieve that. https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::32701bbf-ab5a-419a-9cf9-db62dd7361b3

As of September 4, 2024, I've also drawn a third map. Like with the second map, Donald Trump got a somewhat higher percentage of the vote in the proposed district both times, but like with the first map, he lost the proposed district by a wider margin than his national margin of defeat in the popular vote both times. (Trump won the 2016 election due to the Electoral College but lost the national popular vote to Hillary Clinton.) This map is a sort of compromise between the first map where minority voters can easily elect a candidate of their choice but are in a non-compact district and the second map where their district is quite compact but as competitive as it gets. https://davesredistricting.org/join/236df385-ec75-462a-8b3a-b9237f01e6d7

January 16, 2025 UPDATE: Unfortunately, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit apparently dismissed the case, declining to hear the case and ruling that private individuals cannot sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act - although I've also seen conflicting information that oral arguments in federal court are scheduled for this year. The NAACP declined to appeal the dismissal to the federal Supreme Court, fearing that they'd undermine the Voting Rights Act further in states beyond the Eighth Circuit's jurisdiction given the chance. Still, there may be a path forward. If Congressional candidates Rodney Govens, Marcus Jones and Risie Howard lose, they could sue to try to get a Congressional map that they'd have a reasonable opportunity to win with implemented. Govens and Howard are black Democrats, and Jones is running in the mostly Little Rock-based Second District which he acknowledged is the least Republican-leaning of the state's four. All three of my suggested maps include the Black voters from Little Rock that the initial lawsuit alleged got split among three districts in a minority-majority district, so they should have standing to sue if they lose even if "private individuals" lack standing. I really hoped at least one of the three would somehow win, but because they didn't, I strongly encourage them to sue! PLEASE sign and share if you agree! You can also reach out to Rodney Govens and Marcus Jones via the email addresses or links they've provided in their campaign websites to be sure they see this petition and know that suing over defeat in a racially gerrymandered district could be instrumental to a future Congressional victory. Unfortunately, though, Howard closed his campaign website after the election, and I forgot to reach out to him.