More than a dozen Democrat attorneys general are weighing in on a legal dispute in Georgia over its congressional map, alleging it discriminates against minority voters.
A challenge brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), WilmerHale on behalf of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc., the Sixth District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church and several individual Georgia voters is currently on appeal before the 11th Circuit.
The suit alleges that Georgia lawmakers after the 2020 census enacted a new congressional map that drew district lines, diluting the power of Black voters by not adding new Black-majority districts to reflect growth in the Black population in the metro areas of the state.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and 18 of his colleagues filed an amicus brief on Tuesday, arguing that Georgia’s maps are “diluting minority voting strength.”
SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF BLACK VOTERS IN ALABAMA RACIAL GERRYMANDERING CASE
More than a dozen Democrat attorneys general are weighing in on a legal dispute in Georgia over its congressional map, alleging it discriminates against minority voters. (Fox News/File)
But election watchdog groups say the blue states interjecting in the Peach State’s legal battle to keep a GOP-drawn map is “transparently political.
“This is the left’s playbook for redistricting,” Honest Elections Project Vice President Chad Ennis told Fox News Digital. “They claim every map not tilted towards Democrats is racist.”
In December, an Obama-appointed federal judge ruled that, after an earlier order for Georgia to include one additional majority or near-majority Black district to comply with the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the assembly had “fully complied” with the court.
But the ACLU and others contended the state was still violating the VRA because the new map for creating a majority-Black district in Atlanta simultaneously dismantled a nearby district of mostly minority voters currently represented by a Democrat.
The ACLU contends that the map still violates Section 2 of the VRA, which says, “No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.”
EXPERTS EXAMINE HOW SUPREME COURT COULD OVERHAUL VOTING RIGHTS LITIGATION IN POSSIBLE GERRYMANDERING CASE
California Attorney General Rob Bonta (Mindy Schauer/Digital First Media/Orange County Register via Getty Images/File)
Bonta’s office said the purpose of the blue state amicus brief was for “highlighting the importance of civic engagement from all voters regardless of race, color, or membership in minority-language group, and ensuring that every citizen has the right to vote.”
“The Fifteenth Amendment guarantees all U.S. citizens the right to vote, regardless of race, color, or background,” Bonta said. “Unfortunately, there are those who believe the only way they can win is by denying access and suppressing voters.”
But the Honest Elections Project said the top Democrat state prosecutors “are quick to ignore minority districts when they benefit the Left politically,” naming a recent court battle in Michigan as a prime example.
SUPREME COURT APPEARS TO LEAN IN FAVOR OF UPHOLDING GOP-DRAWN SOUTH CAROLINA CONGRESSIONAL MAP
The Georgia State Capitol in Atlanta (Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Universal Images Group via Getty Images/File)
In December, Michigan’s state House and Senate maps were tossed as racial gerrymanders, a first-of-its-kind loss for a state redistricting commission and a major blow to Democrats’ chances to maintain control of the state legislature, Bloomberg Law reported.
A three-judge federal panel ruled that Michigan’s Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission illegally drew 13 districts’ lines and violated the U.S. Constitution by predominantly focusing on race, minimizing Black voting age population in various Detroit-area districts in a way that denied Black voters the ability to select minority candidates in primaries, the outlet reported.
“The institutional left was silent because the maps benefited them,” Ennis told Fox News Digital.
“None of these attorneys general felt the need to weigh in on that litigation. Their Georgia brief is transparently political and has nothing to do with helping minority voters,” he said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia attorney general and head of the Election Transparency Initiative, told Fox News Digital, “There is no question at all that the Democrat AGs’ amicus brief is political.”
“It is extremely rare to see states engage in election litigation related to a sister state like this,” he said.
Bonta’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
