Federal court orders more special elections—this time, for Mississippi Supreme Court, gives legislature until 2026 to redraw districts
A federal judge has ordered Mississippi to hold special elections for its Supreme Court in November 2026, following an earlier ruling that the state’s judicial electoral map violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
U.S. District Judge Sharion Aycock on Dec. 19, 2025, gave the Mississippi Legislature until the end of its 2026 regular session to draw new Supreme Court district boundaries. If lawmakers fail to act, the court indicated it will adopt its own remedial map.
The order stems from a lawsuit filed in April 2022 by Black civic leaders challenging the state’s Supreme Court district lines, which have remained unchanged since 1987. In August 2025, Aycock ruled that the current configuration illegally dilutes the voting power of Black Mississippians, who make up nearly 40 percent of the state’s population.
What the ruling requires
The Dec. 19 order requires the legislature to enact a new map during its 2026 session that remedies the Section 2 violation. Special elections must be held in November 2026 concurrent with the general election, though the court deferred specifying which seats will be on the ballot until after the new map is drawn.
The plaintiffs had requested special elections for two specific seats in District 1: Place 1, currently held by Justice Kenny Griffis, and Place 3, held by Justice Jenifer Branning. Griffis’s term runs through January 2030, while Branning’s extends to January 2033.
In weighing whether to order special elections, Aycock applied a three-factor test from the U.S. Supreme Court’s North Carolina v. Covington decision, considering the severity of the violation, potential disruption to governance, and judicial restraint concerns.
The judge concluded that without special elections, the harm from electing justices under an unlawful map would persist until 2033--a timeline she found inequitable.
“Refusing to order special elections in this case considering the extensive amount of time remaining on these terms would, in this Court’s view, be inequitable,” Aycock wrote. “It would serve only to further perpetuate the underlying violation.”
Background on the case
The lawsuit, White v. State Board of Election Commissioners, was brought by plaintiffs including Dyamone White, state Sen. Derrick Simmons, veteran Ty Pinkins and educator Constance Slaughter Harvey-Burwell. The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Mississippi, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP represented them.
Mississippi’s Supreme Court consists of nine justices elected from three districts, with each district electing three justices to staggered eight-year terms. None of the three districts currently has a Black voting-age majority.
The plaintiffs argued that District 1, which includes Jackson and part of the Mississippi Delta, could be redrawn to create a majority-Black district while adhering to traditional redistricting principles.
During an eight-day trial in August 2024, expert testimony documented what the court called “extremely high” voting cohesion among Black voters and “strikingly low” support from white voters for Black candidates. Analysis of 19 biracial elections from 2011 to 2023 showed Black voters supported Black candidates at rates between 81 and 96 percent, while white voter support consistently fell below 17 percent and often reached single digits.
Historical context
In more than a century of electing Supreme Court justices, Mississippi has seated only four Black jurists on its highest court: Reuben V. Anderson (1985-1990), Fred L. Banks Jr. (1991-2001), James E. Graves Jr. (2001-2011), and Leslie D. King (2011-present).
All four were initially appointed by governors rather than elected directly, and all held the same seat--District 1, Place 2. Their terms have never overlapped, meaning Mississippi has never had more than one Black justice serving simultaneously on its nine-member court.
No Black candidate has won a contested election to the Supreme Court in nearly two decades.
State response and appeal
The state defendants, including Gov. Tate Reeves, Attorney General Lynn Fitch and Secretary of State Michael Watson, have appealed Aycock’s August liability ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court has stayed its proceedings pending the outcome of other related cases.
State officials argued the plaintiffs were not suffering ongoing harm because Supreme Court justices are judicial officers rather than representatives carrying out constituent policy interests. Aycock rejected this argument as a “non-starter,” noting it would effectively preclude special elections in any case involving judicial electoral maps.
The defendants did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday’s ruling.
Broader implications
The decision arrives at a consequential moment for voting rights law nationally. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering Louisiana v. Callais, a case that could significantly reshape--or potentially invalidate--Section 2’s application to redistricting. The court’s conservative majority has signaled skepticism toward race-conscious redistricting during oral arguments this fall.
A ruling weakening Section 2 could affect the Mississippi case and similar litigation across the South. The Fifth Circuit has explicitly stayed its review of the Mississippi appeal pending outcomes in the Louisiana case and others.
Meanwhile, two Mississippi Supreme Court justices--Robert Chamberlin and James Maxwell--were confirmed to federal judgeships earlier this month, creating additional vacancies Governor Reeves will fill by appointment. Under state law, appointees serve until the next general election occurring nine or more months after the vacancy if more than four years remain on the term.
What happens next
The parties must notify the court within seven days once the legislature either enacts a new map or signals it will not do so. Aycock indicated she will act swiftly following that notification to meet all deadlines necessary for November 2026 elections.
The Legislature’s 2026 regular session begins in January. Lawmakers will face the choice of drawing new Supreme Court districts that comply with the Voting Rights Act or allowing the federal court to impose its own map.
Ari Savitzky, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project, said in a statement following the ruling: “Mississippi is nearly 40% Black, but has never had more than one Black Justice on the nine-member Court. We couldn’t be happier to see justice on the horizon.”
Case: White v. State Board of Election Commissioners, No. 4:22-CV-62-SA, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Image: Carroll Gartin Justice Building, November 2025 (via Google Earth)
 | A guest post by
|
Exceptional breakdown of how judicial gerrymandering operates in practice. The detail about only 4 Black justices in over a century, all appointed rather than elected, really underscores how structural the problem is. I worked on a voting rights case once where we saw similiar patterns of racially polarized voting, but the 81-96% cohesion vs. under 17% white support is stark. That 2033 timeline without special elections would be wild considering the ruling already happened.