A well respected conservative legal expert opined this week that the State of Alabama will be unsuccessful in the current stage of its years-long fight over race-based redistricting.

Tuesday, a three-judge panel issued an injunction against Alabama from using it’s 6-1 Republican leaning congressional map.

In its ruling, the panel wrote, “Ultimately, we cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination,” reaffirming the court’s longstanding opposition to the map advanced by state lawmakers after the Callais decision.

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow with Advancing American Freedom, said on WVNN’s “The Yaffee Program,” that he doesn’t think the U.S. Supreme Court will rule against the injunction.

“[T]he bottom line is I look, they can appeal this decision,” Spakovsky said. “I mean, Alabama could appeal the decision, but I frankly, I just don’t think they’re going to be successful. So I think they’re going to be stuck with what the court says is the 2024 special plan that the court imposed that that keeps those two Democratic seats in place.”

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall filed emergency applications for a stay with the United States Supreme Court Tuesday.

“I think a lot of people are misunderstanding what the Supreme Court said in their decision,” Spakovsky continued. “What they said was that you can’t use race in drawing up district lines until and unless you first actually prove a violation of section two of the Voting Rights Act. In other words, you got to prove that there was intentional racial discrimination going on. If that’s the case, well, then yeah, you can use race to remedy that, but the court made it clear that’s under only very rare circumstances it can be able to prove that, and what the, what these three judges have said in this 100 page opinion is that that that standard was met.”

Spokovsky made it clear he disagrees with the court’s injunction in the case, but still doesn’t think Alabama will be able to reverse it.

“Look, I wasn’t at the trial, I didn’t hear the evidence, but these three judges say the evidence showed that that’s what was what was happening,” he argued. “My, my point is, whether you agree or disagree with that finding, is that, like I said, the judges go to great lengths to relook at the evidence, look at new evidence, and to conclude that their original holding was still correct, even under what the Supreme Court said in the Louisiana case.

“And I just don’t think the Supreme Court is going to overturn the very detailed factual findings that the three judges made in this case,” he added. “So I actually think the appeal is not going to be successful, and I’m just, look, I’m just being realistic here.”

Yaffee is a contributing writer to Yellowhammer News and hosts “The Yaffee Program” weekdays 9-11 a.m. on WVNN. You can follow him on X @Yaffee