The Supreme Court rules on South Carolina’s House map
On Thursday, seven months after it heard oral arguments, the Supreme Court finally ruled in Alexander v. the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, which charged that South Carolina's 1st District was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. In a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the court ruled that a lower court was wrong to strike down the 1st District, but it sent the case back to the lower court for further consideration.
The ruling does not have any immediate practical implications; back in March, the lower court decided that South Carolina would have to use the disputed map in this year's election anyway because the Supreme Court was taking so long to rule. And with the book still open on the case, it's still possible that the district will end up getting struck down again for 2026 and beyond.
However, in his majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito noted the difficulty of proving that race, not partisanship, was the driving factor behind a map when race and partisanship are so closely correlated. In so doing, he raised the standard for proving racial gerrymandering, saying that legislatures should get the benefit of the doubt when they say they were engaging in partisan gerrymandering (which is legal under federal law) instead.