Gerrymandering
Mississippi State Conference of the NAACP v. State Board of Election Commissioners
Mississippi has a growing Black population, which is already the largest Black population percentage of any state in the country. Yet. Black Mississippians continue to be significantly under-represented in the state legislature, as Mississippi’s latest districting maps fail to reflect the reality of the state’s changing demographics. During the 2022 redistricting process, the Mississippi legislature refused to create any new districts where Black voters have a chance to elect their preferred representative. The current district lines therefore dilute the voting power of Black Mississippians and continue to deprive them of political representation that is responsive to their needs and concerns, including severe disparities in education and healthcare.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Gerrymandering
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2024
![South Carolina](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/05/SC-2-600x400.jpg)
Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (Congressional Map Challenge)
South Carolina unlawfully assigned voters to congressional districts based on their race and intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2024
![Louisiana](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/Depositphotos_466919260_S-600x400.jpg)
Callais v. Landry
Whether the congressional map Louisiana adopted to cure a Voting Rights Act violation in Robinson v. Ardoin is itself unlawful as a gerrymander.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2022
![Alabama on a map of the United States of America](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/11/Alabama-Redistricting-SocialShare-600x314.jpg)
Allen v. Milligan
Whether Alabama’s congressional districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because they discriminate against Black voters. We succeeded in winning a new map for 2024 elections which, for the first time, has two congressional district that provide Black voters a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing despite multiple attempts by Alabama to stop us at the Supreme Court. Despite this win, Alabama is still defending its discriminatory map, and trial will occur in February 2025 to determine the map for the rest of the decade.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
25 Gerrymandering Cases
South Carolina
May 2022
![SC Legislative](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/04/230829redistricting-banner-600x300.png)
South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. Alexander (State House Map Challenge)
This case -- part of a broader challenge to South Carolina's redistricting after the 2020 Census -- involved a racial gerrymandering claim against the State's House district lines. Plaintiffs the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and an individual voter challenged the drawing of 29 specific districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. In May 2022, the parties settled their dispute over State House maps, which resulted in redrawn districts in Dillon, Horry, Kershaw, Orangeburg, and Richland counties.
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![SC Legislative](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/04/230829redistricting-banner-600x300.png)
South Carolina
Gerrymandering
South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. Alexander (State House Map Challenge)
This case -- part of a broader challenge to South Carolina's redistricting after the 2020 Census -- involved a racial gerrymandering claim against the State's House district lines. Plaintiffs the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and an individual voter challenged the drawing of 29 specific districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. In May 2022, the parties settled their dispute over State House maps, which resulted in redrawn districts in Dillon, Horry, Kershaw, Orangeburg, and Richland counties.
May 2022
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
Mississippi
Apr 2022
![Mississippi](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/Mississippi-600x485.jpg)
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi’s Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We’re suing because this dilutes the voting strength of Black residents in state Supreme Court elections, in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.
View case
![Mississippi](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/Mississippi-600x485.jpg)
Mississippi
Gerrymandering
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi’s Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We’re suing because this dilutes the voting strength of Black residents in state Supreme Court elections, in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.
Apr 2022
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2019
![A demonstrator at the March On for Voting Rights in Washington D.C. holds up a sign reading "Suppression and Gerrymandering are Not Democracy".](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/11/suppression-and-gerrymandering-are-not-democracy-sign-f-600x300.jpg)
Rucho v. Common Cause/Benisek v. Lamone (Amicus)
Whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable and whether the plaintiffs in North Carolina and Maryland established that the legislatures had impermissibly sought to benefit one party over the other, regardless of how voters voted.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![A demonstrator at the March On for Voting Rights in Washington D.C. holds up a sign reading "Suppression and Gerrymandering are Not Democracy".](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/11/suppression-and-gerrymandering-are-not-democracy-sign-f-600x300.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
Gerrymandering
Rucho v. Common Cause/Benisek v. Lamone (Amicus)
Whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable and whether the plaintiffs in North Carolina and Maryland established that the legislatures had impermissibly sought to benefit one party over the other, regardless of how voters voted.
Jun 2019
Status: Ongoing
View case
May 2019
![OH](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2018/05/web18-ohiocongressionalmapv2-1160x768-1000x666-1-600x400.jpg)
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute v. Smith
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Ohio U.S. congressional map as unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. The lawsuit seeks to replace the map with one that accurately reflects the will of voters and complies with the Constitution.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![OH](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2018/05/web18-ohiocongressionalmapv2-1160x768-1000x666-1-600x400.jpg)
Gerrymandering
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute v. Smith
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Ohio U.S. congressional map as unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. The lawsuit seeks to replace the map with one that accurately reflects the will of voters and complies with the Constitution.
May 2019
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2018
![The back of a demonstrator holding a sign that says "Give Us Fair Districts."](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/12/August_Gerrymandering_FullBleed-600x300.jpg)
Benisek v. Lamone
Does the First Amendment prohibit a state legislature from redistricting that is intended to secure partisan advantage for the governing party and has the effect of entrenching that party’s advantage?
Status: Ongoing
View case
![The back of a demonstrator holding a sign that says "Give Us Fair Districts."](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/12/August_Gerrymandering_FullBleed-600x300.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
Gerrymandering
Benisek v. Lamone
Does the First Amendment prohibit a state legislature from redistricting that is intended to secure partisan advantage for the governing party and has the effect of entrenching that party’s advantage?
Jan 2018
Status: Ongoing
View case