In a Dec. 20 hearing, Georgia Republican leaders are expected to defend their plans to redraw the state's congressional and state legislative districts. However, the people who sued to overturn these districts have launched a scathing attack on the plans, claiming that they do not comply with federal law and fail to properly address the dilution of Black votes while preserving Republican power. The three groups of plaintiffs in the case have filed briefs with U.S. District Judge Steve Jones, urging him to reject Georgia's proposed maps and draw new voting districts himself before the 2024 elections.

During a special legislative session that concluded last week, Republican lawmakers repeatedly stated that their aim was to meet Judge Jones' directive. He had instructed them to create an additional Black-majority congressional district, two additional Black-majority state Senate districts, and five additional Black-majority state House districts. However, the plaintiffs argue that the Republican maps do not adequately rectify the issues identified by Judge Jones under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits the dilution of Black votes. Lawyers representing one of the plaintiff groups stated, "The inescapable conclusion is that the proposed plans do not come close to following the court's order," and referred to them as a "total failure of compliance."

The plaintiffs also contend that the proposed plans unlawfully dismantle other districts that allow Black and other minority voters to elect their preferred candidates. Of particular concern is the elimination of a current district in suburban Atlanta represented by Democratic U.S. Rep. Lucy McBath, while simultaneously creating a new Black-majority district in Fulton, Douglas, Cobb, and Fayette counties. According to the lawyers representing the plaintiffs challenging the congressional map, this move by the General Assembly undermines minority voting opportunity and goes against the intention of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Another issue raised by the plaintiffs is the relocation of Black voters from outside the districts deemed illegal by Judge Jones. Rather than providing sufficient opportunities for Black voters in those areas to elect new representatives, the plaintiffs argue that the plans simply shift voters without addressing the harm caused to specific groups, particularly in the southern and western parts of metropolitan Atlanta.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs challenging the congressional district assert that McBath's current district in Gwinnett and Fulton counties should be protected under the Voting Rights Act as a minority opportunity district, despite not being majority Black. They argue that a coalition of Black, Hispanic, and Asian voters in the 7th District vote cohesively as a group, while facing opposition from white voters who consistently vote against nonwhite-preferred candidates. In response, the state plans to argue that only districts comprised of a single nonwhite group, such as Black voters, are legally protected.

All of the plaintiffs have presented alternative plans drawn up by their own experts, which they believe would be less disruptive and provide fairer outcomes for Black voters. If Judge Jones rejects the state's proposed plans, he may choose to accept one of the alternative proposals or appoint a special master to draw the new districts. The plaintiffs assert that the state's proposed remedy undermines the court's ruling, the Voting Rights Act, and the electoral opportunities for minority voters, emphasizing their claim that "the General Assembly's purported remedy makes a mockery of that process.".