Amicus Curiae Brief — Wes Allen, Alabama Secretary of State, et al., Appellants v. Evan Milligan, et al.

Nos. 21-1086 & 21-1087

In the Supreme Court of the United States

──────────────────────────

JOHN H. MERRILL, ET AL.,

Appellants,

v.

EVAN MILLIGAN, ET AL.,

Appellees.

──────────────────────────

JOHN H. MERRILL, ET AL.,

Petitioners,

v.

MARCUS CASTER, ET AL.,

Respondents.

──────────────────────────

ON APPEAL FROM AND WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

──────────────────────────

BRIEF OF COASTAL ALABAMA PARTNERSHIP

AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS

──────────────────────────

John C. Neiman, Jr.

Counsel of Record

H. William Bloom, III

Jordan A. LaPorta

MAYNARD COOPER & GALE, P.C.

1901 Sixth Ave. N, Ste. 1700

Birmingham, AL 35203

(205) 254-1228

jneiman@maynardcooper.com

May 2, 2022

Counsel for Amicus Curiae

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................... ii

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE .......................................1

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ..............................................5

ARGUMENT....................................................................7

A. Alabama’s Gulf Coast has a long history as

a unique community of interest ...........................9

B. Alabama’s Gulf Coast continues to stand as

a unique community of interest ......................... 13

C. Appellees’ maps would fracture the Gulf

Coast and merge part of it with the

Wiregrass’s divergent community ...................... 17

D. Section 2 does not require this fracturing of

the Gulf Coast community .................................. 23

CONCLUSION ............................................................... 26

ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Abrams v. Johnson,

521 U.S. 74 (1997)....................................................7

Brnovich v. Democratic Nat’l Comm.,

141 S. Ct. 2321 (2021).................................. 8, 24, 26

Bush v. Vera,

517 U.S. 952 (1996)................................................ 25

Georgia v. Ashcroft,

539 U.S. 461 (2003)................................................ 25

League of United Latin Am. Citizens

(“LULAC”) v. Perry,

548 U.S. 399 (2006)................................ 7, 21, 25, 26

Miller v. Johnson,

515 U.S. 900 (1995)..................................................8

Shaw v. Hunt,

517 U.S. 899 (1996)................................................ 25

Shaw v. Reno,

509 U.S. 630 (1993)..................................................8

Thornburg v. Gingles,

478 U.S. 30 (1986)....................................................7

Wesch v. Hunt,

785 F. Supp. 1491 (S.D. Ala. 1992) .........................9

Constitutional Provisions

Archibald, R.,

What’s fueling growth in Alabama’s

fastest growing counties?,

iii

AL.com

(May 11, 2021) ....................................................... 16

Baker, J. & Hanson, T.,

Economic Impact of the 2010 Oil Spill on

Coastal Alabama Marine-Based

Industries,

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

(May 2012) ............................................................. 19

Boissoneault, L.,

Why an Alabama Town Has a

Monument Honoring the Most

Destructive Pest in American History,

Smithsonian Magazine

(May 31, 2017) ....................................................... 20

Braund, K.,

“Hog Wild” and ‘Nuts: Billy Boll Weevil

Comes to the Alabama Wiregrass,

63 Agric. Hist. 15

(1989)...................................................................... 17

Brown, V.,

Mardi Gras: Mobile, Ala., offers a

family-friendly alternative to New

Orleans,

Washington Post

(Feb. 10, 2022)........................................................ 16

Carl, J.,

Carl: Federal strings make future

uncertain for red snapper anglers,

Yellowhammer News

(Oct. 25, 2021) ........................................................ 18

iv

Coughlan, J.,

Gulf Coast Unemployment Trends, 2000

to 2010: Hurricanes, Recessions, Oil

Spills,

Monthly Lab. Rev.

(Aug. 2012) ............................................................. 19

Groom, W.,

Forrest Gump

(Simon & Schuster 2002)....................................... 14

Key, V.O. Jr.,

Southern Politics in State and Nation

(7th ed. 2011) ......................................................... 10

Kiernan, J.,

2020 Mardi Gras Facts – Booze, Floats,

Money & More,

WalletHub

(Feb. 18, 2020)........................................................ 16

Middlebrooks, H.,

As planting is ongoing, Wiregrass

peanut farmers looking for strong 2022

crop,

Dothan Eagle

(Apr. 19, 2022) ....................................................... 19

Pickett, A.,

History of Alabama

(River Cty. Pub. ed., 2003) .............................. 11, 12

Rogers, W. et al.,

Alabama: The History of a Deep South

State

(1994)............................................................ 9, 10, 12

v

Sharp, J.,

Redistricting Alabama: How South

Alabama could be split up due to

Baldwin County’s growth,

AL.com

(Sept. 21, 2021) ...................................................... 23

Staff Reports,

M1 Support Services wins award from

Army Aviation association,

Dothan Eagle

(Nov. 20, 2021) ....................................................... 20

Thomason, M.

Mobile: The New History of Alabama's

First City

(2001)........................................................................9

Winkler, D. & Gordon, B.,

The Effect of the BP Oil Spill on Volume

and Selling Prices of Oceanfront

Condominiums,

89 Land Econ. 614

(2013)...................................................................... 19

Rules of Procedure

Airbus,

https://www.airbus.com ......................................... 15

Austal USA,

https://usa.austal.com/ ........................................... 13

Baldwin County Board of Education,

https://www.bcbe.org/ ............................................ 16

vi

Bayou La Batre Area Chamber,

https://www.bayoulabatreareachamber.o

rg/ ........................................................................... 14

Bon Secour Fisheries,

https://bonsecourfisheries.com .............................. 14

Coastal Alabama Partnership,

http://coastalalabama.org/ ................................. 1, 26

Florida Memory: State Library and

Archives of Florida,

https://www.floridamemory.com/ .......................... 10

Gulf Shores & Orange Beach Tourism,

https://www.gulfshores.com .................................. 14

Library of Congress,

https://www.loc.gov/ ............................................... 12

Mississippi State University Coastal

Research & Extension Center,

http://coastal.msstate.edu ..................................... 14

Mobile County Public Schools,

https://content.schoolinsites.com .......................... 16

National Peanut Festival,

https://www.nationalpeanutfestival.com .............. 20

OntheWorldMap.com,

https://ontheworldmap.com/ .................................. 22

U.S. Army,

https://home.army.mil/ .......................................... 20

U.S. Census Bureau,

https://www2.census.gov/ ................................ 15, 21

1

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE*

Coastal Alabama Partnership is a nonprofit, development-focused organization founded in 2011 by community leaders in Mobile and Baldwin Counties, the

two Alabama counties that border the Gulf of Mexico.

See

Home,

Coastal

Alabama

Partnership,

http://coastalalabama.org/ (visited Apr. 30, 2022).

These leaders came together to provide vision, direction, and action for the vibrant and rapidly growing

area along Alabama’s Gulf Coast:

See Overview, Coastal Alabama Partnership,

http://coastalalabama.org/overview/ (visited Apr. 30,

2022). The region’s strides in recent times have been

remarkable. With an economy that draws strength

from the Gulf and Mobile Bay, and with a natural

beauty and standard of living that has drawn many to

move here, this area is one of the most rapidly growing

parts of Alabama.

No counsel for any party authored this brief in whole or in part,

and no counsel or party made a monetary contribution intended

to fund the preparation or submission of this brief. No person

other than Coastal Alabama Partnership or its counsel made a

monetary contribution to the brief’s preparation or submission.

The parties have filed blanket consent waivers with the Court

consenting to the filing of all amicus briefs.

*

2

Because Coastal Alabama Partnership is focused

on community development and growth—and not partisanship or elections—it is important to explain what

the organization filing this brief is, and what it is not.

Coastal Alabama is not a chamber of commerce or an

economic-development commission, but it works with

the municipalities in these counties to identify opportunities and bring them to fruition. It is not a tourismdevelopment council, but one of its goals is to see tourism flourish. It is not a body of elected officials, but it

is a resource to help them coordinate and implement

a regional strategic plan. Coastal Alabama Partnership is, above all else, what its name suggests—a partnership between business leaders, community leaders, and political leaders, designed to get things done

on Alabama’s coast.

Focused as it is on the shared goals of economic

and community growth, Coastal Alabama Partnership is not a partisan organization. It will say almost

nothing in this brief about political parties or election

campaigns. It will not seek to provide perspective on

all the questions of race this case implicates, or to cast

any doubt on the vital role of the Voting Rights Act.

Nor does Coastal Alabama Partnership dispute that

the federal court’s drawing of Alabama’s congressional map in 1993—which largely is the same map

now in place with minor adjustments for subsequent

population shifts—was consistent with this important

statute.

But a new three-judge court has now ordered that

map to be redrawn in a way that would unnecessarily

undermine Coastal Alabama Partnership’s goals, and

on this new claim this organization can bring an important and unique perspective to bear. As the State’s

3

opening brief explains, under the current map, all of

Alabama’s Gulf Coast community is within a single

congressional district, AL-1, and thus served by a single representative who has focused on helping the

coastal community thrive:

See Ala. Br. 18. Each of the maps proposed by Appellees would carve out an important slice of Mobile

County—containing parts of the City of Mobile—and

put it in a district separate from the rest of the coast:

See Ala. Br. 20; SJA99–109, 149. The removed parts

of Mobile would be represented by a Member of Congress who also represents citizens from locations to

the north. The remainder of the Gulf Coast would be

represented by a Member whose constituents also live

in areas far to the east.

4

Coastal Alabama Partnership is filing this brief to

elaborate on how—as the State has suggested—those

proposed maps would be detrimental to the goals this

organization has sought to achieve. See Ala. Br. 21,

58–60. As explained in the pages that follow, Alabama’s two coastal counties very much form a community of interest whose people, history, economy, and

culture are markedly distinct. The people of this community share those interests regardless of their partisan political affiliations or the color of their skin. Yet

the district court’s order would cut this vital area in

two. That reality, as discussed below, makes a difference to the merits question now before the Court.

5

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

It is important, for groups focused on economic

growth and cultural prosperity, that congressional

districts reflect communities whose interests transcend partisan politics and race. This Court has rightly

read Section 2 in a manner that is consistent with this

principle, precluding courts from re-drawing districts

on the basis of race in disregard of preexisting, nonracial communities of interest. The three-judge panel

misapplied the statute when it required the Alabama

Legislature to draw maps dividing the Alabama Gulf

Coast’s longstanding community of interest in two.

A. This community of interest pre-dates Alabama.

Mobile was the first city founded in the territory that

would become the State, and the coast’s French-influenced culture has long made it distinct. Whether by

the French, the Spanish, or the early United States,

the land along the coast was grouped together—and

separately from the parts of Alabama to the north.

The region’s focus on commerce, shipbuilding, and

coastal-influenced industries created an economy and

polity that historically was often at odds with the

State’s more agrarian, landlocked areas.

B. The coast remains unique. The shipbuilding,

commercial fishing, and tourism associated with the

beaches and bay make the Mobile and Baldwin economy unlike any other in Alabama. The still-palpable

French heritage makes the region culturally distinct.

Business is booming, and the population is growing

rapidly.

C. The maps relied on by the district court would

undermine the recent progress on the coast. The Mobile-Baldwin area has succeeded in no small part be-

6

cause the two counties have been represented by a single Member of Congress. Yet Appellees’ maps would

fuse much of the region with a landlocked, agrarian

area in southeastern Alabama known as the Wiregrass, which has divergent economic and cultural interests. The coast needs a Representative focused on

naval funding, commercial fishing, tourism, and hurricane mitigation. The Wiregrass needs a Representative focused on agricultural issues and Fort Rucker. It

would not even be easy for a Representative to travel

between the two regions. The maps relied on by the

district court would compromise any Representative’s

ability to effectively serve the citizens in these disparate areas.

D. Section 2 serves a critical function in our State

and country, but it cannot require this particular result. AL-1 looks as it does not because of any attempt

to deny Alabama’s citizens an equal opportunity to

vote, but because the coast is a vital community of interest. The district court’s decision would offend the

principles underlying Section 2 by removing parts of

the very heart of this community, the City of Mobile,

due to its racial demographics, and by assuming that

its residents have more in common with residents of

far-flung and dissimilar parts of the State. This

Court’s jurisprudence bars that result, and instead

calls for the courts to maintain this community of interest on Alabama’s Gulf Coast.

7

ARGUMENT

To groups whose goal is to help their communities

grow and thrive, it matters a great deal that congressional districts not be formed by random lines cutting

across streets and neighborhoods. It is imperative

that these districts reflect real, unique communities,

which contain real, unique people, who have real,

unique interests transcending partisan politics. Districts should afford these people a single Representative in Congress who has incentives to focus on the

goals and values that unite these communities—and

who will not be conflicted by obligations owed toward

other communities that do not share the same aspirations. The Voting Rights Act respects these ideals, and

the district court’s decision is wrong because of the

way it would cut Alabama’s Gulf Coast community in

two.

The State’s opening brief addresses the relevant

Section 2 jurisprudence for these purposes and—in

particular—the factors from Thornburg v. Gingles,

478 U.S. 30 (1986). The district court’s treatment of

the Gulf Coast implicates the first Gingles factor:

whether, in proposing a new congressional map for Alabama, Appellees have identified a second majorityminority district that is sufficiently “compact.” As this

Court has explained, determining compactness for

Section 2 purposes requires courts to account for “traditional districting principles such as maintaining

communities of interest and traditional boundaries.”

League of United Latin Am. Citizens (“LULAC”) v.

Perry, 548 U.S. 399, 433 (2006) (citing Abrams v.

Johnson, 521 U.S. 74, 92 (1997)).

8

These principles mean that a court cannot, in the

name of creating additional majority-minority districts, ignore the non-race-related interests that bring

entire neighborhoods, towns, cities, and counties—

and, yes, coasts—together. As this Court has put it,

“[t]he recognition of nonracial communities of interest

reflects the principle that a State may not ‘assum[e]

from a group of voters’ race that they “think alike,

share the same political interests, and will prefer the

same candidates at the polls.”’” LULAC, 548 U.S. at

433 (quoting Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900, 920

(1995) (quoting, in turn, Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630,

647 (1993))). “Legitimate yet differing communities of

interest,” this Court has mandated, “should not be disregarded in the interest of race.” Id. at 434. This

Court’s recent jurisprudence outside the redistricting

context suggests that if the “reason” the State drew its

map as it did was to maintain longstanding communities of interest, the districts are “less likely to violate

§2.” Brnovich v. Democratic Nat’l Comm., 141 S. Ct.

2321, 2339–40 (2021).

The three-judge panel misapplied these principles

when it considered how Appellees’ proposed districts

would affect the community of interest on Alabama’s

Gulf Coast. The court held the Legislature’s maps violative of Section 2 in part by finding that the State’s

interests in maintaining this single community of interest in a single congressional district were “less compelling” than Appellees’ interests in creating new proposed districts. MSA180. In so doing, the three-judge

court misapprehended the significance of Appellees’

premise that, to achieve their new districts, it is necessary to partition the coast. As explained below, the

9

basis for preserving this community in a single congressional district is deep and wide. The fact that Appellees would necessarily split this community in two

means that they can show no Section 2 violation under

the Legislature’s map—and that it is their proposed

districts, rather than the Legislature’s, that are suspect. Previous courts already have rejected congressional maps that would have disunited Mobile

County, in favor of plans that “better preserve[d] the

communities of interests in” current Districts 1 and 2.

Wesch v. Hunt, 785 F. Supp. 1491, 1497 (S.D. Ala.

1992). The district court should have done the same

here.

A. Alabama’s Gulf Coast has a long history as a

unique community of interest

The community of interest on Alabama’s Gulf

Coast did not arise just yesterday—or in the 11 years

since local leaders formed the organization that is filing this brief. The history runs much deeper than

that.

This community existed, in fact, before there even

was an Alabama. Well before the Old World knew the

landscape that would become the rest of the State, it

knew Mobile Bay. See W. Rogers et al., Alabama: The

History of a Deep South State 18 (1994). European colonization began in earnest when the French staked

their claim at Old Mobile in 1702 and then, in 1711,

established the modern City of Mobile. Id. at 26, 28.

The city served as the first capital of French Louisiana

and remained under French control for 60 years. M.

Thomason, Mobile: The New History of Alabama's

First City 34 (2001). The French left a stamp that remains apparent today, founding Alabama’s oldest city

10

and introducing the State’s first Christian denomination. Rogers, supra, at 127, 133. Long after the French

departed, the Alabama coastal Catholic community

remained large and robust, and it has stayed that way

since. See V.O. Key, Jr., Southern Politics in State and

Nation 634 (7th ed. 2011).

After the French and Indian War, the Union Jack

replaced the Fleur-De-Lis—but even then, the coast

remained distinct. Rogers, supra, at 31. The British

grafted this area into their “Fourteenth Colony,” West

Florida, which stretched to the Mississippi River in

the west. Id. at 32. Most of Alabama, on the other

hand, remained under the control of Indian Tribes or

Georgia’s colonial government. Id. at 36.

See Map of West Florida, Florida Memory: State Library and Archives of Florida, https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/35219 (visited Apr. 30, 2022).

The area maintained its character. Trade had been

a focus of these Gulf Coast settlements from the beginning, and it blossomed under British rule. Rogers,

supra, at 35. And while the British introduced several

of their own institutions, such as the Anglican Church

and the Common Law, even they acknowledged that

11

the firmly established Catholic Church should remain. Id. at 33. During the latter part of the American

Revolution, control of Alabama’s Gulf Coast changed

hands again when the Spanish captured Mobile Bay,

but not the rest of the territory that became Alabama.

Id. at 36–37.

It was not until the War of 1812 that the coast became politically connected with the rest of present-day

Alabama. The United States laid claim to the coast at

that time, and it became part of the Mississippi Territory. A. Pickett, History of Alabama 516 (River Cty.

Pub. ed., 2003). Congress then organized the Alabama

Territory in 1818. Id. at 614.

Still, the coast remained discrete. Mobile and

Baldwin Counties were two of the first seven counties

formed in the territory. Pickett, supra, at 614. The territorial government expanded Mobile and Baldwin

Counties concurrently, and they assumed roughly the

shape they have today. Pickett, supra, at 616. Mobile

and Baldwin—along with four other counties—formed

the Southern Territorial Judicial District:

12

See Map of Alabama constructed from the surveys in

the General Land Office and other documents. Improved to 1819, Libr. of Cong., https://www.loc.gov/resource/g3970.ct007144/?r=-0.633,0.406,2.108,0.842,0

(visited Apr. 30, 2022). These counties then became

part of the State of Alabama upon its admission to the

Union in 1819. Pickett, supra, at 660.

In the years that followed, the coast continued to

have unique interests vis-à-vis the rest of the State.

Rogers, supra, at 133–34. By the Civil War, Mobile

was Alabama’s largest city. Id. at 133. The region’s increasing commercialization and reliance on national

and international trade frequently put it in conflict

with the rest of the State. Gulf Coast residents pushed

back against the populace’s general opposition to railroad finance and construction. Id. at 178–79. To help

fund a railway from Mobile to Ohio, Mobilians approved a special “Railroad Tax,” which would have

been a non-starter in the State’s more agrarian regions. Id. at 179. Mobile also emerged as a tourism

hotspot. Id. at 133–34.

The distinctions between coastal and inland Alabama remained in the years following Reconstruction.

World War II had a unique effect on the area. “Mobile

perhaps profited from military growth more than any

other Alabama city.” Rogers, supra, at 512. Companies on the coast produced warships at a breakneck

pace. Id. at 512. The resulting jobs attracted people to

Mobile and surrounding towns. According to the U.S.

Census Bureau, approximately 89,000 people moved

to Mobile County during the war years. Id. But when

the war ended, so did the boom. Id. at 520. The Gulf

Coast lost 40,000 jobs almost overnight, and 55,000

people left for opportunities elsewhere. Id.

13

B. Alabama’s Gulf Coast continues to stand as a

unique community of interest

Past is prologue, and the coast’s economy and culture—which have experienced massive growth in recent decades—remain heavily influenced by the salt

water at its southern edge. The resulting community

of interest echoes the region’s unique history and distinguishes its residents from the rest of Alabama’s.

Shipbuilding in these parts, for instance, continues to be a proud and—for Alabama—distinctive tradition. As former AL-1 Representative Bradley Byrne

testified in the district court, “you have people here

who are like fifth, sixth generation ship builders.”

JA812. An emphasis of Coastal Alabama Partnership’s founding entities has been to help attract large

employers who can harness this experience. Austal

USA, an international ship manufacturer, is now

headquartered in Mobile and currently employs 3,500

people. Austal USA, https://usa.austal.com/ (visited

Apr. 30, 2022). The facility specializes in manufacturing ships for the U.S. Navy. Id. Just this April, Austal

opened a new steel shipbuilding facility in Mobile to

augment its existing aluminum production capabilities. Austal USA Celebrates Opening of Steel Facility,

Austal USA, Apr. 12, 2022, https://usa.austal.com/

news/Steel-Line-Start-Event. This new expansion will

bring more jobs and was made possible by financing

“provided in part by a Defense Production Act (DPA)

Title III Agreement between the U.S. Department of

Defense, in support of the U.S. Navy shipbuilding industrial base, and Austal USA.” Id.

The tourism industry likewise continues to flourish in ways that differentiate Alabama’s coast from

parts of the State to the north and east. Vacationers

14

come to both sides of Mobile Bay. According to the Alabama Tourism Department, 6 million people visited

in 2020, spending $6 billion locally. F. Henley, Gulf

Shores & Orange Beach Tourism unveils 2020 economic impact report and 2021 Outlook at annual summit, May 4, 2021, Gulf Shores & Orange Beach Tourism, https://www.gulfshores.com/media/leisure-pressreleases/gulf-shores-orange-beach-tourism-unveils2020-economic-impact-report-and-2021-outlook-atannual/. The tourism revenue supports nearly 51,000

jobs. Id.

Commercial fishing and seafood distribution have

also distinguished the coast’s economy from the rest

of the State’s. Between 2011 and 2017, the seafood industry averaged almost $520 million in sales and supported nearly 12,000 jobs. Economic Impacts of the Alabama Seafood Industry, Miss. State Univ. Coastal

Research & Extension Ctr., http://coastal.msstate.

edu/economic-impacts-alabama-seafood-industry (visited Apr. 28, 2022). Baldwin County’s Bon Secour

Fisheries, for example, began by delivering oysters to

Mobile and surrounding communities in the late 19th

century and now ships seafood nationwide. Our Story,

Bon Secour Fisheries, https://bonsecourfisheries.com/our-story/ (visited Apr. 30, 2022). Just across

the Bay is Bayou La Batre, unofficially known as “the

Seafood Capitol of Alabama.” About Bayou La Batre,

Bayou La Batre Area Chamber, https://www.bayoulabatreareachamber.org/About-Bayou-La-Batre

(visited Apr. 30, 2022). It has attracted talented fishermen—in real life, and not just in Forrest Gump—

since it was established in 1786. See W. Groom, Forrest Gump 59, 237 (Simon & Schuster 2002). Today,

15

the town’s seafood industry has an economic impact of

more than $80 million annually.

The industrial advantages that took root during

World War II have facilitated a new economic effervescence. Several large companies have set up shop

near the Port of Mobile because of the logistical advantages the Bay and River provide. One of the primary reasons Airbus put its first U.S.-based aircraft

manufacturing facility on Alabama’s Gulf Coast, employing over 1,000 people, was that the location was

perfect for receiving shipments from European ports.

Celebrating five years of production in Mobile, U.S.,

Airbus (Sept. 14, 2020), https://www.airbus.com/en/

newsroom/news/2020-09-celebrating-five-years-ofproduction-in-mobile-us. One multinational steel

manufacturer, AM/NS Calvert, uses Mobile County’s

rivers to receive raw material shipments from Brazil.

It is joined by several other steel companies like Outokumpu, SSAB, and Earth Pipe. The boomtown is

back.

The Gulf Coast’s burgeoning economic opportunities have strengthened the ties between Mobile and

Baldwin Counties. Lots of people live in one county

and work in the other. Since 2000, the Census Bureau

has included both counties in the same Combined Statistical Area and Metropolitan Statistical Area. See,

Alabama: 2020 Core Based Statistical Areas and

Counties, U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division,

https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/metromicro/reference-maps/2020/state-maps/01_Alabama_2020.pdf. And while the City of Mobile has long

been a significant draw to the region, Baldwin County

is now the fastest-growing county in the State. R.

Archibald, What’s fueling growth in Alabama’s fastest

16

growing counties?, AL.com (May 11, 2021), https://

www.al.com/news/2021/05/whats-fueling-growth-inalabamas-fastest-growing-counties.html.

It's not just the economy. Anyone from other parts

of Alabama will tell you coastal culture is, well, different. It is difficult for outside observers—even from

places as close as Huntsville, Birmingham, and Montgomery—to get their heads around how important

Mardi Gras is to Alabamians on the coast. Stemming

from its French Catholic heritage, Mobile is the source

of America’s first Mardi Gras celebrations—a fact people from both counties are quick to note when they

make friends from New Orleans. See, e.g., V. Brown,

Mardi Gras: Mobile, Ala., offers a family-friendly alternative to New Orleans, Washington Post (Feb. 10,

2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/

02/10/mobile-alabama-mardi-gras/. Schoolkids have

actual Mardi Gras holidays each year: in 2022, they

got—in combination with President’s Day—three

straight days off. See Mobile County Public Schools

2021-2022 School Year Calendar, Mobile County Public Schools, https://content.schoolinsites.com/api/documents/d3b369f711e74992810d11706cbb5d02.pdf;

Baldwin County Board of Education 2021-2022 Calendar, Baldwin County Board of Education,

https://www.bcbe.org/cms/lib/AL01901374/Centricity/

Domain/4/2021-2022%20BCBE%20Approved%20Calendar.pdf (both visited Apr. 30, 2022). Businesses

shut down. Lawyers stop billing hours and get frustratingly hard to find. But the pause is good for the

local economy, creating 12,811 jobs. J. Kiernan, 2020

Mardi Gras Facts – Booze, Floats, Money & More, WalletHub (Feb. 18, 2020), https://wallethub.com/blog/

17

mardi-gras-facts/31999. And to these counties’ residents, it is much more than a big party. Mardi Gras is

a fundamental part of the unique society they have

built on the coast.

C. Appellees’ maps would fracture the Gulf

Coast and merge part of it with the Wiregrass’s divergent community

It is no little thing to this amicus that Appellees’

Section 2 claim would sever Alabama’s Gulf Coast

community. Each of Appellees’ proposed maps would

extend a new, thin arm from the congressional district

to the north, to cleave away residents from the oldest

part of the Gulf Coast community, the City of Mobile.

To compensate for the population Appellees would remove, each of those maps would consolidate the rest

of Mobile and Baldwin Counties with a district, served

by a single Member of Congress, that includes several

counties with no connection to the water or the coast.

See supra at 3.

Put to the side, for the moment, the fact that Appellees would separate the citizens in the very heart

of the Alabama coast from the rest of their community. This brief will have more to say on that point in

a moment. It also is remarkable that Appellees would

merge the remaining parts of the coast with counties

to the east. Those counties are part of an area known

as “the Wiregrass,” for its ubiquitous fields of longbladed grass. K. Braund, “Hog Wild” and ‘Nuts: Billy

Boll Weevil Comes to the Alabama Wiregrass, 63

Agric. Hist. 15, 16–17 (1989). It consists of nine predominantly rural counties in the State’s southeast:

18

See id. at 16. From the perspective of an organization

whose goal is to ensure that the Gulf Coast continues

to thrive, lumping the coast and the Wiregrass into a

single district would be a serious, and counter-productive, mistake. These regions may be part of the same

State, but as practical matter they are worlds apart.

JA492–93.

Mobile and Baldwin Counties’ interests, on the one

hand, are tied to the water. Their coastal economy relies on commercial fishing, ship manufacturing, and

beach tourism. Year in and year out, the area’s residents need their Representative in Congress attending to matters, like federally prescribed parameters of

red-snapper season, that may seem insignificant to

others but are vitally important to the coast. J. Carl,

Carl: Federal strings make future uncertain for red

snapper anglers, Yellowhammer News (Oct. 25, 2021),

https://yellowhammernews.com/carl-federal-stringsmake-future-uncertain-for-red-snapper-anglers/.

They need their Representative addressing hurricanes and funding for the Corps of Engineers to

19

dredge the Port of Mobile. See D. Winkler & B. Gordon, The Effect of the BP Oil Spill on Volume and Selling Prices of Oceanfront Condominiums, 89 Land

Econ. 614 (2013); J. Baker & T. Hanson, Economic Impact of the 2010 Oil Spill on Coastal Alabama MarineBased Industries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (May 2012), https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/38190; J. Coughlan, Gulf

Coast Unemployment Trends, 2000 to 2010: Hurricanes, Recessions, Oil Spills, Monthly Lab. Rev. 11

(Aug. 2012). They need legislation like the Gulf of

Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, 43 U.S.C. § 1331,

which provides revenue sharing to coastal regions for

environmental restoration and establishes regulatory

measures to prevent oil spills.

The Wiregrass’s residents need their Representative focused on different things. With no coastline, agricultural interests predominate there. Peanut farming—basically unheard of in Mobile and Baldwin

Counties—has played a unique historical role in the

southeastern part of the State. It contributes over

$210 million to the Wiregrass economy annually. H.

Middlebrooks, As planting is ongoing, Wiregrass peanut farmers looking for strong 2022 crop, Dothan Eagle (Apr. 19, 2022), https://dothaneagle.com/news/

business/as-planting-is-ongoing-wiregrass-peanutfarmers-looking-for-strong-2022-crop/article_

71df3fec-bff2-11ec-bc61-674bfc963634.html. One of

the region’s larger municipalities has a 13-foot monument to the boll weevil—that’s right, the insect—to

commemorate its role destroying cotton and forcing

farmers to diversify crops. L. Boissoneault, Why an Alabama Town Has a Monument Honoring the Most De-

20

structive Pest in American History, Smithsonian Magazine (May 31, 2017), https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/agricultural-pest-honored-herald-prosperity-enterprise-alabama-180963506/. The

Wiregrass’s largest city, Dothan, holds a 10-day National Peanut Festival each year. National Peanut

Festival, https://www.nationalpeanutfestival.com/p/

about (visited Apr. 30, 2022). The Wiregrass’s representative in Congress needs to hone in on these agricultural issues that have no special relevance to the

coast.

But the differences between these communities are

about more than agriculture versus fishing, or peanut

festivals versus Mardi Gras. Of particular importance

in Congress will be the roles different branches of the

Armed Forces play in these areas. The Gulf Coast’s

military ship-building industry depends on naval

funding. The Wiregrass, on the other hand, is home to

Fort Rucker and the U.S. Army Aviation Center of Excellence. U.S. Army Aviation Center of Excellence and

Fort Rucker, https://home.army.mil/rucker/index.php/

about/usaace (visited Apr. 30, 2022). Many local businesses focus on servicing Army helicopters. See Staff

Reports, M1 Support Services wins award from Army

Aviation association, Dothan Eagle (Nov. 20, 2021),

https://dothaneagle.com/news/local/m1-support-services-wins-award-from-army-aviation-association/article_8311c4a6-5224-11ec-8fb3-3f31618cce56.html.

Placing these two military-dependent communities of interest in the same congressional district could

create serious conflict. As Representative Byrne testified, funding for military-related expenditures is not

automatic, and Members fight for those dollars each

21

year. JA813. “There were all sorts of people,” he explained, “trying to take the money away from those

programs that they were building ships for, for other

programs.” JA849. The people of the Gulf Coast deserve a representative who advocates for Navy-focused interests, just as the people of the Wiregrass deserve a representative who pushes for Army funding

there. To paraphrase what Representative Byrne said

below, if these two communities of interest are combined and a single Member of Congress must represent them both, “somebody is going to lose out.”

JA822. Indeed, perhaps everybody in these two areas

will. As this Court has put it, “[t]he practical consequence of drawing a district to cover two distant, disparate communities is that one or both groups will be

unable to achieve their political goals.” LULAC, 548

U.S. at 434.

The differences between the two communities also

are about more than their economies. Mobile and

Baldwin Counties have grown more urban and suburban by the year, while the Wiregrass has remained

mostly rural. Mobile is Alabama’s fourth largest city,

and Baldwin is its fastest growing county. The Wiregrass’s largest city by a significant margin, Dothan,

has a population that is less than half of Mobile’s.

Quick Facts: Dothan City, Alabama, U.S. Census Bureau,

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/

dothancityalabama/POP060210 (visited Apr. 30,

2022).

It is not even easy to get from one of these places

to the other. The best way for a congressman to see

constituents in both Mobile and Dothan on the same

day would generally involve driving through Florida,

22

heading as far east as the turn-off to Panama City,

and then turning north back into Alabama:

Map of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, https://

ontheworldmap.com/usa/state/alabama/mapof-alabama-georgia-florida.html (visited Apr.

30, 2022)

So the district court has read Section 2 to mandate

congressional boundaries around parts of the State

that are not even well connected with roads. That cannot be what the statute requires. The lack of infrastructure tying these areas together underscores a

disconnect on a more fundamental level, as well as the

reason they have not been part of the same congressional district. The maps ordered by the three-judge

court would not further the economic and community

goals that the amicus has sought to achieve on the

coast—and they would not, by all appearances, further the economic and community goals that Wiregrass-based leaders and organizations are trying to

achieve for their region, either.

It is no answer to say, as the district court did, that

“the Legislature has repeatedly split Mobile and Baldwin Counties in creating maps for the State Board of

Education districts.” MSA180. The Board of Education is the Board of Education. Congress is Congress.

Education policy is generally not driven by the nearby

23

presence of large bodies of water. Matters relating to

military funding, infrastructure building, and commercial regulation inevitably are. One member of Mobile’s state legislative delegation—who happens to be

a Democrat—offered the following bipartisan sentiment at the time the Legislature drew the current

map, with its current AL-1: “I consider Mobile and

Baldwin counties one political subdivision and would

prefer that these two Gulf Coast counties remain in

the same congressional district because government,

business and industry in the two counties work well

together—with our congressman—for the common

good of the two counties.” J. Sharp, Redistricting Alabama: How South Alabama could be split up due to

Baldwin County’s growth, AL.com (Sept. 21, 2021),

https://www.al.com/news/2021/09/redistricting-alabama-how-south-alabama-could-be-split-up-due-tobaldwin-countys-growth.html (quoting Rep. Adline

Clarke, D-Mobile). One of her Republican colleagues

agreed that putting these counties that “work good together as a region” in two different congressional districts “would be counterproductive on what we need.”

Id. (quoting Rep. Matt Simpson, R-Daphne).

D. Section 2 does not require this fracturing of

the Gulf Coast community

This amicus is a nonpartisan group whose focus is

economic and community development, not political

parties and elections. This amicus knows that Section

2 has corrected serious injustices in Alabama and

elsewhere, and it does not doubt that this statute

should continue to play an important role throughout

the Nation. But while much can and should be said

about the progress Section 2 has allowed the country

to achieve, splitting this coastal community in two—

24

and, in particular, excising significant portions of the

City of Mobile—cannot be what the statute mandates.

As the foregoing discussion suggests, the “reason”

AL-1 is shaped as it is, and the “reason” it encompasses Alabama’s entire Gulf Coast, has no connection

to the ills Section 2 is designed to eradicate. Brnovich,

141 S. Ct. at 2339–40. AL-1’s current lines do not

mark, in the statute’s words, a “denial” or “abridgement” of anyone’s right to vote, or an attempt to make

districts that are “not equally open” to all voters. 52

U.S.C. §10301(a) & (b). AL-1 looks as it does—and includes the parts of the City of Mobile the district

court’s order would remove—because of the history

and culture that have made the coast unlike any other

part of the State. AL-1 looks as it does because the

French sailed here at the turn of the 18th century, and

because their contributions have been apparent ever

since. The district looks this way because of the Bay,

the beaches, and the boats that have defined this region in the intervening 300 years.

It is no comfort, to those who have witnessed the

role that the region’s unity in Congress has played in

helping it succeed, that the proposed maps would separate from the rest of the coast what might appear—

to some, at first glance—to be a relatively small sliver

of Mobile County. That supposedly small sliver, on

every map, consists of large chunks of the City of Mobile. And that city is the very heart of this coastal community. Mobile is where the French planted their flag.

It has always been the region’s largest city. It is where

the ships are built, and where the economy finds its

center. To suggest that Alabama’s Gulf Coast commu-

25

nity would remain relatively intact if you took out Mobile is a little like saying that New York City would

remain relatively intact if you took out Manhattan.

There is something outright alarming, moreover,

in the suggestion that Section 2 would gerrymander

out this heart of the coastal community on the theory

that the true interests of Mobile’s residents—due to

their overall racial demographics—must necessarily

align with inland areas far to the east and the north.

It goes without saying—at least, among those who

know the coast—that all Mobilians are vital members

of this community. Regardless, the cultural and geographic dynamics that have brought this area together transcend race and partisanship, and Mobile is

a central part of those dynamics. And there is no legitimate basis, this Court has emphasized, “to believe

a district that combines two farflung segments of a racial group with disparate interests provides the opportunity that §2 requires or that the first Gingles condition contemplates.” LULAC, 548 U.S. at 433. That is

so because one purpose of the Voting Rights Act is “to

foster our transformation to a society that is no longer

fixated on race.” Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U.S. 461, 490

(2003). This Court has therefore held that proposed

majority-minority districts were not sufficiently compact where they combined minority communities from

urban and rural areas, or split counties and cities into

different districts. See LULAC, 548 U.S. at 434–35;

Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899, 916 (1996); Bush v. Vera,

517 U.S. 952, 965–66 (1996) (plurality op.). That is

what the proposed new maps would do to the City of

Mobile.

That result would not be good for Mobile or the rest

of the coast, and it cannot be what Section 2 dictates.

26

Alabama’s coastal community has gotten things done

in unprecedented ways by endeavoring, as Coastal Alabama Partnership says at the top of its website, to

“leverage the strength of every area of our two counties to focus on what is important for Coastal Alabama.” Coastal Alabama Partnership, http://coastalalabama.org/ (visited Apr. 30, 2022). Section 2, and the

“totality of circumstances,” does not require this progress to end. Brnovich, 141 S. Ct. at 2339–40. Quite

the opposite. They call for respect, and deference to,

the Legislature’s choice of “maintaining” this community of interest. LULAC, 548 U.S. at 433–34.

CONCLUSION

This Court should reverse the judgment of the District Court.

Respectfully submitted,

May 2, 2022

John C. Neiman, Jr.

Counsel of Record

H. William Bloom, III

Jordan A. LaPorta

MAYNARD COOPER & GALE, P.C.

1901 Sixth Avenue North

2400 Regions/Harbert Plaza

Birmingham, AL 35203

(205) 254-1228

jneiman@maynardcooper.com