2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Alabama

[Torie]

Assuming Alabama keeps its 7th seat, a lawsuit is born. I was able using the 2018 numbers to draw two CD's, that are both over 50% black in population, as well as over 50% BCVAP. I now accept my accolades. Suitable for framing, no? Please do not get overly effusive. That would make me blush. Thank you.

In other news, as much as it may shock you, the remaining CD's are not politically competitive.  

[ProgressiveModerate]

It's a no-win for the GOP on whether AL loses a district. If it does, the GOP will have to cut one of their own districts. If not, Democrats can make the case for a second VRA district, though whether the lawsuit suceeds is an open question.

[lfromnj]

It's a no-win for the GOP on whether AL loses a district. If it does, the GOP will have to cut one of their own districts. If not, Democrats can make the case for a second VRA district, though whether the lawsuit suceeds is an open question.

Yes because splitting Mobile in half is totally going to fly by Thomas or the 11th circuit.

[ProgressiveModerate]

It's a no-win for the GOP on whether AL loses a district. If it does, the GOP will have to cut one of their own districts. If not, Democrats can make the case for a second VRA district, though whether the lawsuit suceeds is an open question.

Yes because splitting Mobile in half is totally going to fly by Thomas or the 11th circuit.

We'll see. Circuit courts tends to not be hyper-partisan, and there is a strong case for it. You don't even have to split Mobile City:



There is a road connectivity issue but an exception could be made as is the case with LA-1. Generally, VRA districts take precedent over county splits, city lines, and other traditional guidelines of drawing districts.

[lfromnj]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Road connectivity is hardly a hurdle to 2 VRA seats. Just take the bare minimum of precincts along the city shoreline.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Even with 6 seats, it is possible to draw 2 Dem districts - even without splitting Mobile.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/3935470e-4f7f-44ee-aec7-0d913809fe45

And here's a 7 seat map on a similiar concept.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e7a07ee-8cf0-4d10-8926-50be3efcbfeb

[Torie]

Even with 6 seats, it is possible to draw 2 Dem districts - even without splitting Mobile.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/3935470e-4f7f-44ee-aec7-0d913809fe45

And here's a 7 seat map on a similiar concept.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e7a07ee-8cf0-4d10-8926-50be3efcbfeb

Both of  your CD's are below 50% BCVAP, which is where the heavy lifting is, to get over that.
But I notice that while you are using 2018 population numbers, you are using 2010 VAP numbers. You might switch to 2018 VAP numbers on the DRA to see if that gets both of your CD's over the 50% BCVAP hurdle. If not, no cigar unless the census numbers, or to put it more accurately, whatever algorithm will be used by the courts to estimate such numbers, gets you over the top, or the VRA law further evolves.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Even with 6 seats, it is possible to draw 2 Dem districts - even without splitting Mobile.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/3935470e-4f7f-44ee-aec7-0d913809fe45

And here's a 7 seat map on a similiar concept.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e7a07ee-8cf0-4d10-8926-50be3efcbfeb

Both of  your CD's are below 50% BCVAP, which is where the heavy lifting is, to get over that.
But I notice that while you are using 2018 population numbers, you are using 2010 VAP numbers. You might switch to 2018 VAP numbers on the DRA to see if that gets both of your CD's over the 50% BCVAP hurdle. If not, no cigar unless the census numbers, or to put it more accurately, whatever algorithm will be used by the courts to estimate such numbers, gets you over the top, or the VRA law further evolves.

I don't care about BCVAP, personally. Districts like NC-01 never had an absolute need to be majority black CVAP anyway (I'm aware that what can be done to individual districts can vary quite a bit depending on specific case law). I agree that VAP can be of validity, but CVAP is no cigar for me.

[Torie]

Even with 6 seats, it is possible to draw 2 Dem districts - even without splitting Mobile.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/3935470e-4f7f-44ee-aec7-0d913809fe45

And here's a 7 seat map on a similiar concept.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e7a07ee-8cf0-4d10-8926-50be3efcbfeb

Both of  your CD's are below 50% BCVAP, which is where the heavy lifting is, to get over that.
But I notice that while you are using 2018 population numbers, you are using 2010 VAP numbers. You might switch to 2018 VAP numbers on the DRA to see if that gets both of your CD's over the 50% BCVAP hurdle. If not, no cigar unless the census numbers, or to put it more accurately, whatever algorithm will be used by the courts to estimate such numbers, gets you over the top, or the VRA law further evolves.

I don't care about BCVAP, personally. Districts like NC-01 never had an absolute need to be majority black CVAP anyway (I'm aware that what can be done to individual districts can vary quite a bit depending on specific case law). I agree that VAP can be of validity, but CVAP is no cigar for me.

It's a legal issue, under the VRA, as to what triggers the legal requirement for a performing minority district, not a policy issue. I discussed this at length with Muon2 recently. It may be true that the law is not crystal clear on this matter, but it is an issue. Another issue, is when you hit the trigger, are you then required to avoid a gerrymander and erose CD's that have more of a minority population than you need to make the CD minority performing? I think the answer to that is probably yes. So the irony is that having drawn two CD's that effect the trigger, you then cannot actually draw them, because they are erose and gerrymandered black packing CD's. So you then, e.g., under the VRA, end up having to drawing a black performing CD nested in Jefferson County, which in this case is what hewing to appropriate redistricting principles as to what is good policy would dictate anyway. The dance is a most complicated two step.

Have I made this all perfectly clear? Yes, I thought not. Good luck!  

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

It's absolutely hyper-partisan to argue that a seven seat Alabama map where you can easily create two Majority-Minority districts with over 50% AA CVAP should only have one majority-minority district b/c you think it would likely lead to Republicans losing a seat.  NC-12 and VA-3 were drawn as racial gerrymanders designed to dilute minority representation.  For example, VA-3 being canceled led to two AA districts in VA.  IIRC, NC-12 was also scrapped b/c it was designed as a racial gerrymander to dilute minority representation (if memory serves, there were even e-mails from a GOP redistricting operative indicating this was the case in NC, but I could be mistaken).  

There's no real argument against drawing two majority-minority seats if Alabama keeps its 7th district other than "racial gerrymanders are okay as long as it helps the Republican Party politically."  I mean, if you think the Justices on the pertinent Courts are so partisan that they'll subscribe to that view then fair enough, I suppose.  But let's not pretend this is about anything other than Republican partisanship.

[Stuart98]

You can actually get two majority black districts with 6 districts, though it requires splitting Huntsville.

[lfromnj]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

It's absolutely hyper-partisan to argue that a seven seat Alabama map where you can easily create two Majority-Minority districts with over 50% AA CVAP should only have one majority-minority district b/c you think it would likely lead to Republicans losing a seat.  NC-12 and VA-3 were drawn as racial gerrymanders designed to dilute minority representation.  For example, VA-3 being canceled led to two AA districts in VA.  IIRC, NC-12 was also scrapped b/c it was designed as a racial gerrymander to dilute minority representation (if memory serves, there were even e-mails from a GOP redistricting operative indicating this was the case in NC, but I could be mistaken).  

There's no real argument against drawing two majority-minority seats if Alabama keeps its 7th district other than "racial gerrymanders are okay as long as it helps the Republican Party politically."  I mean, if you think the Justices on the pertinent Courts are so partisan that they'll subscribe to that view then fair enough, I suppose.  But let's not pretend this is about anything other than Republican partisanship.

NC12/VA03 aren't 2010 Racial Gerrymanders. They are leftovers/vestiges from Bush/Barr 1990 lawsuits working with Southern black Democrats to increase Black and Republican representation within the South by streching the VRA.. NC Democrats drew the same NC 12 in 2002 to 2010 and the 1990s. The GOP drew NC 12 like that because it was precedent, there isn't any need to put part of a sink with the Greensboro area because the surrounding area has always been very Republican. VA03 did give the GOP a definite partisan advantage however. Either way with SCOTUS cancelling districts that connected Charlotte and Greensboro or Richmond and the Hampton Roads they certainly aren't going to start demanding the Mobile area be split. The same goes in Louisiana, a 2nd VRA district is also very unlikely there. Instead expect a fair map in Louisiana that focuses on a  Lean to Likely R district based in Baton Rouge.

Ironically the old NC Map would have been better for NC Democrats in 2018 with them certainly flipping NC09 and probably flipping NC02 as both of them voted for Biden !.

[Torie]

You can actually get two majority black districts with 6 districts, though it requires splitting Huntsville.

That purple thing of yours is almost certainly not compact enough to effect the trigger.

A couple of more generalized comments about what will probably the most interesting VRA issue/case of the cycle, and thus my interest. The black population where it counts may be higher than what is now 5 year old data, per Muon2 as to the staleness of the data. Second some of the "precincts" in Alabama have like 10K people in the DRA shape files. When we get real precincts, lines can be more tailored to keep "unnecessary" whites out. So there is probably some wiggle room when we get down to having real data and real precinct lines, to get up to the 50% BCVAP trigger. It is unlikely however that one will be able to get there with a 6 CD map. These are my surmises anyway.

Finally, if there is a way to make a Jefferson County dominated CD that is not a performing black CD, that does not make the state map look like a gerrymander per se overall, to mitigate their VRA exposure,  they would be well advised to draw it (not sure that is possible, but whatever). An example would be to de-nest a Jefferson County CD at the margins, say in order to avoid a county chop elsewhere, or a municipal chop of some importance. The idea is to locate chops where it most benefits them, without degrading too much its overall score based on neutral redistricting principles. I played that game with my Pubmander lite map of Missouri. So many games, so little time.

Below is the kind of direction that I am talking about. The blue CD is close to a swing CD (which the Pubs might be wise  to settle for nevertheless under the theory that pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered), designed so that the map does not appear to be facially a gerrymander designed to screw the blacks. It would need to be very carefully done, so the green CD is not excessively black, i.e. a black pack. How to most effectively do it will depend on the final numbers, with much smaller units to work with. One "precinct" I found had 61K people. That is not very helpful when it comes to game playing.

[EastAnglianLefty]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

It's absolutely hyper-partisan to argue that a seven seat Alabama map where you can easily create two Majority-Minority districts with over 50% AA CVAP should only have one majority-minority district b/c you think it would likely lead to Republicans losing a seat.  NC-12 and VA-3 were drawn as racial gerrymanders designed to dilute minority representation.  For example, VA-3 being canceled led to two AA districts in VA.  IIRC, NC-12 was also scrapped b/c it was designed as a racial gerrymander to dilute minority representation (if memory serves, there were even e-mails from a GOP redistricting operative indicating this was the case in NC, but I could be mistaken).  

There's no real argument against drawing two majority-minority seats if Alabama keeps its 7th district other than "racial gerrymanders are okay as long as it helps the Republican Party politically."  I mean, if you think the Justices on the pertinent Courts are so partisan that they'll subscribe to that view then fair enough, I suppose.  But let's not pretend this is about anything other than Republican partisanship.

NC12/VA03 aren't 2010 Racial Gerrymanders. They are leftovers/vestiges from Bush/Barr 1990 lawsuits working with Southern black Democrats to increase Black and Republican representation within the South by streching the VRA.. NC Democrats drew the same NC 12 in 2002 to 2010 and the 1990s. The GOP drew NC 12 like that because it was precedent, there isn't any need to put part of a sink with the Greensboro area because the surrounding area has always been very Republican. VA03 did give the GOP a definite partisan advantage however. Either way with SCOTUS cancelling districts that connected Charlotte and Greensboro or Richmond and the Hampton Roads they certainly aren't going to start demanding the Mobile area be split. The same goes in Louisiana, a 2nd VRA district is also very unlikely there. Instead expect a fair map in Louisiana that focuses on a  Lean to Likely R district based in Baton Rouge.

Ironically the old NC Map would have been better for NC Democrats in 2018 with them certainly flipping NC09 and probably flipping NC02 as both of them voted for Biden !.

The existence of the present NC-6 does constitute a fairly significant flaw in your argument.

[lfromnj]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

It's absolutely hyper-partisan to argue that a seven seat Alabama map where you can easily create two Majority-Minority districts with over 50% AA CVAP should only have one majority-minority district b/c you think it would likely lead to Republicans losing a seat.  NC-12 and VA-3 were drawn as racial gerrymanders designed to dilute minority representation.  For example, VA-3 being canceled led to two AA districts in VA.  IIRC, NC-12 was also scrapped b/c it was designed as a racial gerrymander to dilute minority representation (if memory serves, there were even e-mails from a GOP redistricting operative indicating this was the case in NC, but I could be mistaken).  

There's no real argument against drawing two majority-minority seats if Alabama keeps its 7th district other than "racial gerrymanders are okay as long as it helps the Republican Party politically."  I mean, if you think the Justices on the pertinent Courts are so partisan that they'll subscribe to that view then fair enough, I suppose.  But let's not pretend this is about anything other than Republican partisanship.

NC12/VA03 aren't 2010 Racial Gerrymanders. They are leftovers/vestiges from Bush/Barr 1990 lawsuits working with Southern black Democrats to increase Black and Republican representation within the South by streching the VRA.. NC Democrats drew the same NC 12 in 2002 to 2010 and the 1990s. The GOP drew NC 12 like that because it was precedent, there isn't any need to put part of a sink with the Greensboro area because the surrounding area has always been very Republican. VA03 did give the GOP a definite partisan advantage however. Either way with SCOTUS cancelling districts that connected Charlotte and Greensboro or Richmond and the Hampton Roads they certainly aren't going to start demanding the Mobile area be split. The same goes in Louisiana, a 2nd VRA district is also very unlikely there. Instead expect a fair map in Louisiana that focuses on a  Lean to Likely R district based in Baton Rouge.

Ironically the old NC Map would have been better for NC Democrats in 2018 with them certainly flipping NC09 and probably flipping NC02 as both of them voted for Biden !.

The existence of the present NC-6 does constitute a fairly significant flaw in your argument.

Thats because they saw the gig was up with the State court which focused on partisanship. Look at the old map from 2016 to 2018 where the Greensboro area was split up in a fairly compact manner and where all 3 districts still held in 2018.

Mchenry won by 160k votes while Budd won by 120k votes. Kathy Manning only won by 100k votes . Very easy to divide the 3 districts as earlier done for 3 Likely to Safe R districts with little significant trends in any direction. I expect the GOP to either bring back the compact full crack for 2022 or at the very least attach Randolph and Rockingham county to Greensboro instead of Winston Salem for a swing district due to the more favorable court make up. The former would hardly even look gerrymandered as its just 3 compact counties-30k people. There also plenty of legislative Ds who require bribed seats such as in Asheville. A fair map in Asheville would have one super Safe D seat and 2 tossup seats.. Instead the city gets split for 3 Safe D legislative seats.
For examples

Option 1



Tilt D Clinton +1 Seat.

Option 2

A likely R seat combining High Point and Winston Salem at Trump +9.5 and a Lean Trump +5 Greensboro+random rurals.

One could even place Highpoint/Greensboro/Winston Salem in3 seperate districts for 2 Safe R and a last likely R without even splitting any cities. Once you start splitting the cities its get even easier. Now if the NC GOP wanted to go back to 11-3 which is something I don't think they will do, it does get a bit trickier because you do need some of the surrounding counties to help crack suburban Wake county but still very much doable with regards to the numbers.

Overall the point stands these areas were still just as Republican back in 08 as any city trend has been cancelled out by the rurals and the main reason for the OLD NC12 was actually adhering to VRA precedent from what was believed to be it in 2010.

[Zaybay]

Its not hyperpartisan to argue against a split of the Mobile area.. Its literally D partisan hackishness to demand the split of region so they can get another congressional seat in Alabama. There is 0 chance for it in the current Alabama district  courts/11th circuit/SCOTUS . And so far recent court precedence at SCOTUS has taken more of a liking for actual communities when forming VRA districts which is why VA03 and NC12 were cancelled.

It's absolutely hyper-partisan to argue that a seven seat Alabama map where you can easily create two Majority-Minority districts with over 50% AA CVAP should only have one majority-minority district b/c you think it would likely lead to Republicans losing a seat.  NC-12 and VA-3 were drawn as racial gerrymanders designed to dilute minority representation.  For example, VA-3 being canceled led to two AA districts in VA.  IIRC, NC-12 was also scrapped b/c it was designed as a racial gerrymander to dilute minority representation (if memory serves, there were even e-mails from a GOP redistricting operative indicating this was the case in NC, but I could be mistaken). 

There's no real argument against drawing two majority-minority seats if Alabama keeps its 7th district other than "racial gerrymanders are okay as long as it helps the Republican Party politically."  I mean, if you think the Justices on the pertinent Courts are so partisan that they'll subscribe to that view then fair enough, I suppose.  But let's not pretend this is about anything other than Republican partisanship.

NC12/VA03 aren't 2010 Racial Gerrymanders. They are leftovers/vestiges from Bush/Barr 1990 lawsuits working with Southern black Democrats to increase Black and Republican representation within the South by streching the VRA.. NC Democrats drew the same NC 12 in 2002 to 2010 and the 1990s. The GOP drew NC 12 like that because it was precedent, there isn't any need to put part of a sink with the Greensboro area because the surrounding area has always been very Republican. VA03 did give the GOP a definite partisan advantage however. Either way with SCOTUS cancelling districts that connected Charlotte and Greensboro or Richmond and the Hampton Roads they certainly aren't going to start demanding the Mobile area be split. The same goes in Louisiana, a 2nd VRA district is also very unlikely there. Instead expect a fair map in Louisiana that focuses on a  Lean to Likely R district based in Baton Rouge.

Ironically the old NC Map would have been better for NC Democrats in 2018 with them certainly flipping NC09 and probably flipping NC02 as both of them voted for Biden !.

Your entire argument fails to acknowledge one of the most important facets to this entire process: demographic change. Simply put, the racial makeup of regions change over time. What worked in the 90s and 00s became unworkable in the 2010s.

Lets look at NC-12. When that seat was drawn in the 2000s, the seat was drawn as a minority-opportunity seat with a white plurality. By the end of the decade, the seat had become plurality black, and population growth meant that you could easily just nestle a seat in Charlotte that would check off the same boxes as the previous incarnation. Instead, the GOP maintained the configuration and used it to sink minority voters in towns that the previous seat had never even wrapped towards. We already know what their intention was, and the courts agreed that such a map was used to dilute the minority vote.

The story is almost the exact same for VA-03. In the 90s, it was drawn that way to give African Americans a seat in the state. By the 2010s, this seat had become so bloated with African American voters that it actively hurt them to keep the seat as one whole. The GOP kept it as a whole seat for the purposes of racial gerrymandering, even when the census data pointed towards two seats being optimal for VRA purposes. The courts agreed and struck it down in 2016.

Getting this back to AL, demographic change is impacting the state as well. While the black belt has been depopulating, Birmingham has seen a substantial increase in its AA population, to the point that the current configuration redrawn just to accommodate for population would see African Americans crammed in a seat reaching around 70%. This is in a state where, according to the 2018 census numbers, it'd be rather simple to draw two AA seats where both would be majority AA and by a strong margin just by taking in precincts from Mobile. Multiple folks in this thread have already drawn excellent maps that accomplish this goal.

The argument for having two seats is rather strong, and in all honesty it is very hyperpartisan to argue that splitting the city (which is extremely common across the nation for VRA purposes, see Tallahassee, Birmingham, Montgomery, Columbus GA, etc) is somehow a huge taboo and that African Americans should effectively just be crammed into one seat where they can pretty cleanly get two.

[lfromnj]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Harris

The 5-3 decision included 4 Liberal justices+ Thomas due to his wonderful consistency when it comes to VRA stuff. GL getting his vote when you want to go from changing an ugly compact gerrymander to a more compact map  to changing a fairly compact district and natural COI,(AL 1st) to a split district. Maybe Ds can cancel the weird arm in AL01 but that's about it and its merely a few thousand people in that weird part. This isn't even forgetting that the court make-up has changed.  Maybe they can also push for something to change with AL07 but there is no chance the current courts will split Mobile so Democrats can get their 2nd seat.

[Greedo punched first]

Check out this Alabama map!



Partisan lean.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Harris

The 5-3 decision included 4 Liberal justices+ Thomas due to his extreme consistency when it comes to VRA stuff. GL getting his vote when you want to go from changing an ugly compact gerrymander to a more compact map  to changing a fairly compact district and natural COI,(AL 1st) to a split district. Maybe Ds can cancel the weird arm in AL01 but thats about it and its merely a few thousand people in that weird part.

Do you think Thomas would accept a district placing at least the lion's share of Mobile County in AL-01?

[lfromnj]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Harris

The 5-3 decision included 4 Liberal justices+ Thomas due to his extreme consistency when it comes to VRA stuff. GL getting his vote when you want to go from changing an ugly compact gerrymander to a more compact map  to changing a fairly compact district and natural COI,(AL 1st) to a split district. Maybe Ds can cancel the weird arm in AL01 but thats about it and its merely a few thousand people in that weird part.

Do you think Thomas would accept a district placing at least the lion's share of Mobile County in AL-01?

No, again he might see AL07 as a racial gerrymander but that doesn't mean he wants to make 2 racially gerrymandered districts instead by taking an arm into Mobile. Also D's still need to find another 5th justice even if they somehow got Thomas who will not join D's in their quest to split to Mobile for their 2nd seat in Alabama.

[Stuart98]

You can actually get two majority black districts with 6 districts, though it requires splitting Huntsville.

That purple thing of yours is almost certainly not compact enough to effect the trigger.

I mean, if a Mobile to Montgomery district is sufficiently compact, then who's to say a Birmingham to Huntsville district isn't? It's a stretch to be sure, but not a massive one.

[Torie]

You can actually get two majority black districts with 6 districts, though it requires splitting Huntsville.

That purple thing of yours is almost certainly not compact enough to effect the trigger.

I mean, if a Mobile to Montgomery district is sufficiently compact, then who's to say a Birmingham to Huntsville district isn't? It's a stretch to be sure, but not a massive one.

Well, OK. Snake things like that appear considerably different to me than a prong jutting south a bit from where a CD has a bunch of contiguous counties, covering territory that all the way is substantially black, rather than a much longer snake covering territory where blacks are very thin on the ground. But hey, what floats my boat may sink yours. Again, we are talking just about trigger mechanisms here under the VRA, not what must be drawn, or even perhaps what may ultimately be legally drawn. The VRA is packed with quick sand traps every step of the way in fact patterns such as presented in Alabama. It is kind of a legal nightmare really - at least when it comes to Alabama. The existing Alabama map btw looks as illegal as hell to me even at the time it was drawn. That is puzzling to me in and of itself. Gross gerrymandering to black pack is a good way to get yourself in legal trouble in a hurry. Just ask the Virginia Pubs about that one.

[kwabbit]

I made a quick, easy map if the VRA was less strictly enforced, which may be possible with the Supreme Court arrangement. What's less possible is that it would lead to  2 Dem seats in Alabama. Both seats are around Biden +10 if I'm guessing. The Birmingham based seat is around 41% Black and the Montgomery Seat is about 48% Black. Both should be performing and elect Black Democrats, although they could be won by Republicans in extreme wave years.

No chance this is what the map looks like, but this is probably what it would like like if it was drawn in the way of the current NC map where race is less of a factor. Only 4 county splits, most of which are relatively small, the only large one being the split of Tuscaloosa county. 

[Torie]

And if two black performing CD's are required because two are triggered per the 50% BCVAP test, that is the kind of map that in general might well be required. But in reality, it is less likely the triggers will be found, if you have a map that does not look much like a gerrymander per se.