A three-judge panel in Alabama has ordered the state to redraw its Congressional map to include another Black district after state lawmakers failed to do so following a federal court order. The map not only goes against the court’s ruling but also a U.S. Supreme Court decision and federal law.

The Tuesday decision came after months of back-and-forth between the Alabama Legislature and The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Based on court records, the judges demanded lawmakers create another majority-Black district in response to a lawsuit filed in 2021. The Legislature had until late July to submit the new map.

They found that the original map violated Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which forbids discriminatory voting practices on the basis of race, color or membership of certain language minority groups.

“We are not aware of any other case in which a state Legislature — faced with a federal court order declaring that its electoral plan unlawfully dilutes minority voters and requiring a plan that provides an additional opportunity district — responded with a plan that does not provide that district,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus, U.S. District Judge Anna M. Manasco and U.S. District Judge Terry F. Moorer.

“The law requires the creation of an additional district that affords Black Alabamians, like everyone else, a fair and reasonable opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.”

The Congressional map currently on the books only has one majority-Black district in the state. It has been in use since 2013. Redistricting typically occurs every ten years.

This is the first time that Alabama — and all states — have had the opportunity to draw new Congressional maps since the 2013 Supreme Court care Shelby v. Holder, which did away with the preclearance requirement certain states and regions needed when redistricting.

Under preclearance, officials like attorneys general or a three-judge panel would determine whether a submitted map violated portions of the Voting Rights Act governing gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement.

In response to a June Supreme Court ruling, the state asked for five weeks to draw a new map.

On July 21, the new Congressional districts were approved by Republican Gov. Kay Ivey without the second majority-Black district. As a result, the judges decided against giving state lawmakers another opportunity to design the map.

Similar kerfuffles have taken place in Texas and Louisiana within the last few years. In 2021, Texas created new redistricting lines that opponents said disenfranchised voters of color while leaving the state’s Republican party more control.

In June, the Supreme Court sent a Louisiana redistricting case down to an appeals court. As in Alabama, Louisiana’s map only included one majority-Black district.

Opponents of the current Congressional map in Louisiana are seeking another majority-Black district so Black residents might elect a candidate of their choice. Black residents make up about 33 percent of the state’s population.

The appeals court has not yet reached a decision on the matter.

In Tuesday’s ruling, Alabama judges expressed frustrations over the prolonged process.

“We are three years into a ten-year redistricting cycle and the Legislature has had ample opportunity to draw a lawful map.” the judges wrote.

The court has instructed a special master and cartographer to redesign the Congressional map to include the added district to satisfy requirements in accordance with the 1965 Voting Rights Act, but it’s not clear when the process will be completed.

“We are deeply troubled that the State enacted a map that the State readily admits does not provide the remedy we said federal law requires,” the opinion reads.

In a joint statement released by the Legal Defense Fund, the plaintiffs decried the state’s actions in regards to their suit.

“History is repeating itself and the district court’s decision confirms that Alabama is again on the losing side. We demand that Alabama again move out of the way and obey our laws — we demand our voting rights.”