Alabama's 2021 congressional districting plan was preliminarily enjoined under §2 of the Voting Rights Act because it splintered one community of interest, the Black Belt, while keeping together another, the Gulf Coast. In 2023, Alabama passed a new plan uniting the Black Belt counties into as few districts as possible. Even so, the district court permanently enjoined the 2023 plan because it did not racially divide the Gulf to place more black voters from "Black Belt counties in a majority-Black district." App.345. The court further held that the State's refusal to intentionally create a second majority-minority district constituted intentional racial discrimination. The court dismissed the notion that the State was trying to avoid gerrymandering claims, though such claims were pending and others threatened; drew racial inferences from race-neutral legislative findings; held that the preliminary ruling on the 2021 Plan eliminated Alabama's politics defense for the 2023 Plan; and treated efforts to persuade the court that the 2023 Plan was not racially dilutive as evidence of dilutive intent. The questions presented are:

1. Does §2 require Alabama to segregate a conceded community of interest to combine black voters from that community with black voters elsewhere to form a majority-black district?

2. Whether §2 can require Alabama to intentionally create a second majority-minority district without violating the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

3. Does §2 create a privately enforceable right?

4. Did Alabama violate the Fourteenth Amendment by declining to draw a race-based plan?

Does §2 of the Voting Rights Act require Alabama to create a second majority-minority district despite potential constitutional concerns?