Demonstrators Arrested In TN, AL Ahead of Redistricting Efforts
Demonstrators Arrested In TN, AL Ahead of Redistricting Efforts
Republicans in numerous Southern states pressed forward with redistricting ahead of midterm elections, meeting protests and heated resistance from Democrats and civil rights organizations.
Tennessee, Alabama, and South Carolina lawmakers considered measures that might alter majority-Black congressional districts after a recent United States Supreme Court ruling on congressional redistricting.
Law enforcement at the Tennessee State Capitol went viral for having to physically drag out protesters who refused to leave and maintain order.
Tennessee Republicans advanced a proposed congressional redistricting map out of committee after it was stalled through the night, paving the way for full debate in both houses.
The Republican-backed model splits Shelby County into three congressional districts and Nashville into three districts as well. The Democratic version of the plan, which would have preserved Memphis and Nashville entire, died in committee.
The new congressional map cleared the House Congressional Redistricting Committee and the House Finance Ways and Means Committee. The map later cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Finance Committee.
Several companion measures also passed their required committees. A bill to modify the filing deadline for candidacy cleared the required House and Senate committees. A bill to abolish an earlier Tennessee statute that barred redistricting between federal censuses also passed the necessary committees.
The man arrested was KeShaun Pearson, the brother of Democratic state Representative Justin J. Pearson, who has also been known to stage protests at the Tennessee State Capitol.
WATCH:
The redistricting fight is now going terribly for Democrats.
“On April 22, House Democrats were riding high. They’d just won a huge gamble in Virginia, spending tens of millions of dollars on a redistricting referendum aimed at netting them up to four new seats. President Donald Trump — who set off the unprecedented national redistricting fight in Texas last year — was tanking in the polls, dragging down Republicans everywhere,” Punchbowl News reported.
“Overall, it looked like Democrats had held Republicans to a draw in the redistricting wars and were on their way to the House majority. But the last two weeks have suddenly turned rough for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Democratic Caucus. They’re facing legal setbacks on redistricting across multiple fronts, developments that have reshaped the battle for the House. As many as 10 seats could now swing toward Republicans in a worst-case scenario for Democrats, although this all remains very fluid,” the outlet added.
In a worst-case scenario for Democrats, as many as 10 seats might suddenly flip to Republicans, but it is all still very fluid.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to eviscerate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and another late round of GOP redistricting have substantially changed the fortunes of Democrats.
Florida Republicans, for starters, pushed through an aggressive gerrymander that might oust four Democrats from the delegation. Even many Republicans were stunned by the plan from GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Then Virginia’s Supreme Court indicated it was contemplating overturning the Democrats’ hard-won referendum triumph. Nobody knows what will happen there.
Plus, a Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Callais has opened up several seats across the South, notably in Louisiana, Alabama, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
Virginia Democrats are starting to worry that the Virginia Supreme Court will strike down the voter-approved plan that might give them up to four blue seats. The court refused to certify the April 21 redistricting referendum and left Virginia election authorities and candidates in uncertainty.
If the new map gets blocked, Democrats’ best chance is to take down GOP Reps. Rob Wittman and Jen Kiggans, but Republican Reps. John McGuire and Ben Cline are expected to survive.
Louisiana Republicans are poised to drag at least one of the two Democrats out of the Bayou State’s House.
Alabama GOP officials are asking the Supreme Court to remove an injunction that requires the state to hold onto its congressional map until 2030. Republicans might also target Democratic Rep. Terri Sewell, whose district is headquartered in Birmingham, in theory.
South Carolina is considering a new map that would erase the deeply blue seat of Democratic Icon Jim Clyburn.
Republican Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves told the Daily Caller he is considering running to knock out Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson’s seat in the western section of the state. Mississippi already had its primary, thus this is probably a 2028 move.
None of these GOP-drawn maps are set in stone yet.
Florida map faces various lawsuits. But even if the map holds, Jeffries and Democratic leaders hope they can flip a few light red seats from the GOP. South Carolina Republicans are no sure bet to get their map through.
SHOWDOWN ON THE FIVE: Jessica Tarlov Drops Truth Bomb on GOP’s Controversial Voter Legislation
SHOWDOWN ON THE FIVE: Jessica Tarlov Drops Truth Bomb on GOP’s Controversial Voter Legislation
WASHINGTON — A ferocious battle over the soul of American democracy erupted on cable news this week, proving once again that the clash over election integrity is reaching a boiling point.
During a high-stakes segment on Fox News' top-rated program The Five, liberal co-host Jessica Tarlov ignited an intense firestorm by sounding the alarm on the Republican-backed SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act).
Her warning was sharp, direct, and unapologetic: This isn't just a simple Voter ID bill—it’s a bureaucratic roadblock designed to keep millions of legal Americans away from the ballot box.
"Far Beyond Voter ID": Tarlov Sounds the Alarm
While GOP proponents frame the SAVE Act as a common-sense measure to restore trust in elections, Tarlov shredded that narrative live on air, dissecting the fine print of the proposed federal mandate.
Under the bill, anyone registering to vote in federal elections would be legally required to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship—such as a physical U.S. passport, a certified birth certificate, or naturalization papers.
"People hear 'Voter ID' and think it’s just showing a driver's license at the counter," Tarlov argued. "It’s not. This bill demands physical proof of citizenship upfront. Millions of everyday, hard-working American citizens do not have a valid passport sitting in a drawer or immediate access to an official birth certificate. This creates an artificial barrier to a fundamental constitutional right." without instant paperwork access.
Integrity Guardrail or Voter Suppression? The Great Debate
The fiery television debate reflects a massive political rift tearing through Capitol Hill and statehouses across the country.
The Conservative Defense: Republican sponsors and conservative commentators insist the measure is vital to national security and sovereign elections. They argue that verifying citizenship at registration is a necessary safeguard to prevent non-citizens from ever slipping onto federal voter rolls.
The Progressive Pushback: Critics like Tarlov argue that non-citizen voting in federal elections is already illegal, strictly policed, and exceptionally rare. Opponents caution that adding heavy administrative hurdles will unintentionally disenfranchise lawful voters—particularly students, low-income citizens, rural voters, and women whose names have changed due to marriage.
The Stakes Couldn't Be Higher
As the debate over voter access versus election security intensifies, the SAVE Act has turned into a major political litmus test.
Is requiring physical proof of citizenship a mandatory protection to guarantee that every vote is lawful? Or is it an unnecessary, red-tape nightmare that punishes legal citizens for not having their paperwork in order?
One thing is certain: as long as voices like Jessica Tarlov continue to push back on prime-time television, the fight over who gets to vote—and how hard it is to do so—is far from over.
Jessica Tarlov Says Trump Has 35% Approval Rating in Most Polls
Supporters of the bill strongly disagree, saying it is designed to protect election integrity by preventing non-citizens from registering to vote. Opponents argue the existing safeguards are already sufficient and fear the measure could unintentionally disenfranchise lawful voters. Is the SAVE Act a necessary election safeguard, or does it create unnecessary barriers to voting?
