Alabama’s top law enforcement officer filed a Supreme Court challenge aimed at overturning a prior ruling that limited Republicans in decennial redistricting, after a recent Louisiana case raised questions about how the court previously ruled there.

Louisiana’s «Callais» ruling struck down the state’s map, including districts centered on New Orleans and a narrow majority-minority corridor from Baton Rouge. Alabama leaders said the decision conflicts with or calls into question Supreme Court precedent affecting their state by requiring racial factors to be considered when drawing congressional districts.

«Now they have a framework for Alabama to directly defend what the legislature did both in 2021 and 2023,» said Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, telling Fox News Digital he was «thrilled» to see where the court came down on Callais at the end of April.

«And that is, drawing maps based on historical redistricting principles that now I think Callais makes clear were constitutional exercises of that authority,» Marshall said, highlighting SCOTUS’ analysis that race should not predominate when drawing congressional districts.

SUPREME COURT RULES ON KEY VOTING RIGHTS ACT RULE AS REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WAGE REDISTRICTING WAR

«And then unlike Louisiana, which was able to get direct relief through that decision, we now have to be removed from the injunction [against Alabama’s prior map] by the three-judge panel in order to either go back to the map that is being challenged or give the legislature the authority to draw a new map.»

A previous Supreme Court ruling, Allen v. Milligan, invalidated Alabama’s prior redistricting effort, with critics saying the decision wrongly weighted racial factors in creating what became a second Democratic-favored district in the ruby-red state.

If Alabama is able to get out from under Milligan, it could have national implications for Democrats’ attempts to gain enough seats in the slim GOP-majority U.S. House this fall, as Montgomery’s so-called Livingston map, originally struck down in the 2023 case, would see new life.

Marshall, who is also running to succeed retiring Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., this fall, said urgency before the court is important with the May 19 primary approaching.

«Because the lower court’s injunction cannot stand in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling, we have asked the court to lift the injunction. Alabama deserves the right to use its own maps, just like every other state.» 

The AG said he is working separately from state lawmakers, who are in special session through Friday to address the legislative side of the fight, and that his office is «singularly focused» on getting legal relief from the Supreme Court.

GOP SPEAKER CLAPS BACK AFTER BOOKER STUMPS AGAINST BID TO ERADICATE RED STATE’S LONE DEMOCRAT-HELD DISTRICT

He also said that, regarding race, the Alabama of the 2020s is not the Alabama of the 1960s and that there are few, if any, barriers to minority suffrage in the Yellowhammer State.

«You saw some of that sentiment from Justice Kavanaugh in a concurrence in the [Milligan] case that Alabama had there a few years ago, saying there’s a point in time in which we have to acknowledge that circumstances have changed,» he said, as the prior case forced Alabama to draw a second district where Black voters have a meaningful opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice.

For Democratic critics like New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who descended on Alabama to push back — as he did at a counter-redistricting forum in Birmingham with the city’s Mayor Randall Woodfin and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Doug Jones — Marshall suggested they get their own house in order up north.

«[They’re] arguing for proportional representation, which is basically what they are saying, they make that same argument in Maine, in Rhode Island, in New Hampshire — where you don’t see a single congressional member there from the Republican Party.»

Underlining that New England states have large blocs of «unaffiliated» or independent voters, gerrymander critics often point to the region because those who are Republican essentially have no voice in Washington.

Maine is considered the most moderate of the states, with an estimated Republican bloc of about 30%, while Vermont’s more vague registration system resulted in about the same percentage of vote share going to President Donald Trump in 2024.

VIRGINIA CONGRESSMAN SAYS SPANBERGER WANTS TO ‘TURN US INTO NEW ENGLAND’

Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts all have between 10% and 40% Republican vote share, presuming a bloc of the «unaffiliated» group votes at times for Republican candidates. Those states have more than 40% of their people registered unaffiliated or similar.

Fox News Digital reached out to Booker earlier this week on similar criticism but did not receive a response.

Marshall said his work is not necessarily in concert with the legislature, but the two are on similar tracks.

«While we’ll obviously watch what the legislature is doing, our job is to secure the relief from the [2023 redistricting] injunction as quickly as possible.»

«And the other thing, not only are we working on the state congressional map, but it’s also, we have a state Senate district [map] likewise that was subject to redrawing based upon a [Voting Rights Act] Section 2 challenge,» he said.

Steve Marshall, Alabama’s attorney general, speaks during a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Al Drago/Getty Images)

His office is also involved in the New Orleans-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to challenge the state’s senatorial map while seeking Supreme Court review on the congressional front.

While Marshall spoke to Fox News Digital before the Supreme Court of Virginia struck down the Democratic-led redistricting map there, he called Richmond’s move «clearly [done] for hyper-political reasons that kept none of the traditional principles in mind.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Alabama’s redistricting efforts have aimed to follow the letter and spirit of the law, and the attorney general said he hopes to have a real chance of receiving favorable corrective action from the nation’s highest court and remedying a fight the Yellowhammer State previously lost.

Secretary of State Wes Allen indicated the May 19 primary will go on as expected, meaning Marshall’s motions may come just in time to give Republicans another incremental advantage in a nationally relevant electoral landscape.

La Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO) y el Gobierno de Guatemala firmaron el 11 de mayo de 2026 el nuevo Marco de Programación de País 2026–2029, una hoja de ruta orientada a fortalecer la seguridad alimentaria, reducir la pobreza y transformar los sistemas agroalimentarios del país.

Según el comunicado oficial de la Vicepresidencia de la República de Guatemala, este acuerdo establece un compromiso estructural entre el Estado y la cooperación internacional para incidir en políticas públicas, garantizar una mejor nutrición y avanzar en la resiliencia ambiental, alineando esfuerzos hacia los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible.

La ceremonia se realizó en el Palacio Nacional de la Cultura, con la participación de René Orellana Halkyer, subdirector general y representante regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe, y Carlos Mendoza, secretario de planificación y programación de la presidencia (SEGEPLAN).

También asistieron Rafael Zavala, representante de la FAO en Guatemala, Miguel Barreto, coordinador residente del Sistema de Naciones Unidas en el país, y, como testigo de honor, la vicepresidenta de la República, Karin Herrera. El evento congregó a autoridades del Ejecutivo, delegaciones del Sistema de Naciones Unidas, representantes del ámbito académico, organizaciones de la sociedad civil y de la cooperación internacional, según reportó la Vicepresidencia.

El Marco de Programación de País 2026–2029 define las prioridades de asistencia técnica de la FAO en Guatemala, estableciendo la alineación de la cooperación institucional con el Plan Nacional de Desarrollo K’atun 2032, las prioridades nacionales de desarrollo, la política general de gobierno 2024–2028 y el marco de cooperación de Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo Sostenible.

Tres grandes ejes orientan la labor de la FAO en esta fase: la innovación e inclusión para una producción sostenible, enfocada en reforzar las capacidades de los agricultores familiares y optimizar tanto el acceso a mercados como la resiliencia del sector rural; la promoción de entornos alimentarios saludables para reducir todas las formas de malnutrición; y el fortalecimiento de la gobernanza de los recursos naturales y la adaptación a la variabilidad climática, con énfasis en la gestión sostenible de los ecosistemas.

La vicepresidenta Karin Herrera destacó: “Hoy damos un paso importante en nuestro objetivo compartido, de que todas y todos los guatemaltecos tengan la oportunidad de vivir en un país con más oportunidades y bienestar. Que esta firma nos recuerde que enfrentar la inseguridad alimentaria y la malnutrición no es una tarea aislada, requiere de alianzas multisectorial, participación compartida y la implementación de políticas sostenidas”.

Carlos Mendoza, secretario de SEGEPLAN, enfatizó la dirección estratégica del proyecto: “Hoy, con la suscripción de este Marco, reafirmamos nuestro compromiso con una planificación orientada a resultados, con un desarrollo inclusivo y sostenible, y con una cooperación internacional que contribuya de manera efectiva a cerrar brechas y generar oportunidades en nuestro país”.

Por su parte, René Orellana Halkyer, representante regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe, señaló: “La firma de este instrumento representa una valiosa oportunidad para seguir consolidando una agenda de cooperación conjunta alineada con las prioridades nacionales, la planificación gubernamental y con la visión de desarrollo del país. Agradecemos al Gobierno de Guatemala por su confianza y la invitación a acompañar este importante proceso”, según la Vicepresidencia.

El acuerdo se constituye como la principal directriz de planificación para la cooperación técnica entre la FAO y Guatemala hasta 2029, con impacto en la seguridad alimentaria, la reducción de desigualdades y la lucha contra la pobreza. Su diseño responde a la meta de sumar esfuerzos institucionales en favor del desarrollo sostenible y la resiliencia ante los retos climáticos y sociales.

The U.S. ​State Department ‌announced on Monday that it refused to back an ​International Migration Review Forum «progress» declaration, ​accusing the U.N. of efforts to «advocate and facilitate replacement immigration in the United States and across the broader West.»

The U.S. did not participate in the second International Migration Review Forum, held May 5–8 at U.N. Headquarters in New York, and will not support the declaration, the department said in a statement on Monday.

The forum is the U.N.’s main global platform for member states to review implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, according to the U.N. Network on Migration. The 2026 forum was scheduled to produce an intergovernmentally agreed «Progress Declaration.»

President Donald Trump ended U.S. participation in the U.N. process to develop the Global Compact for Migration during his first term in 2017, and now the State Department says the federal government will again affirm its opposition.

TRUMP PULLS US OUT OF UN-LINKED MIGRATION FORUM IN BOLD IMMIGRATION MOVE

The Global Compact was adopted in 2018 after the U.S. withdrew from the process. The U.N. and International Organization for Migration describe the compact as a cooperative framework intended to improve migration governance across countries.

«As Secretary Rubio said, opening our doors to mass migration was a grave mistake that threatens the cohesion of our societies and the future of our peoples,» the department’s statement reads. « In recent years, Americans witnessed first-hand how mass immigration laid waste to our communities: crime and chaos at the border, states of emergency in major cities, and billions of taxpayer dollars funneled towards hotels, plane tickets, cell phones and cash cards for migrants.»

«Much of this was driven by UN agencies and their partners, which did not just facilitate the invasion of our country, but proceeded to redistribute our own people’s wealth and resources to millions of foreigners from the worst corners of the world,» it continued.

The department argued there was nothing safe, orderly or regular about any of this, adding that the costs «were borne primarily by working Americans forced to compete for scarce jobs, housing, and social services.»

«The UN has little to say about them,» the department wrote.

TRUMP UNVEILS ‘REVERSE MIGRATION’ PLAN TO HALT ‘THIRD WORLD’ IMMIGRATION, REVOKE BIDEN-ERA ENTRIES

The U.S. refused to participate in an International Migration Review Forum. ( Alex Brandon / POOL / AFP via Getty Images)

«President Trump is focused on the interests of Americans, not foreigners or globalist bureaucrats,» the statement reads. »The United States will not support a process that imposes, overtly or by stealth, guidelines, standards, or commitments that constrain the American people’s sovereign, democratic right to make decisions in the best interests of our country.»

The department concluded its statement by saying its goal is not to «manage» migration, but to «foster remigration.»

In a thread on X also announcing the move to object to the declaration, the department said UN agencies «systematically facilitated mass migration into America and Europe, even as citizens of these nations called for restrictions on migration.» It added that U.N. materials related to the Global Compact call for expanding regular migration pathways and reference «regularization» of migrants.

The International Organization for Migration says the forum is held every four years for countries to review progress and shape next steps on migration policy. IOM, which coordinates the U.N. Network on Migration, says the network includes 39 U.N. agencies working to support countries on migration issues.

The department alleged that «UN agencies – working with the NGOs they fund – established a migration corridor through Central America and to the U.S. border,» the post reads. «As the American people suffered under an unprecedented wave of mass migration, the UN was on the ground pipelining migrants to our southern border.»

The State Department said its goal is not to «manage» migration, but to «foster remigration.» (Denis Balibouse/File Photo/Reuters)

«After facilitating mass migration to the United States, UN agencies condemned the deportation of illegal immigrants,» the post continued. «While the United Kingdom faced unprecedented illegal boat crossings, UN agencies condemned plans for deportations. UN officials lobbied aviation regulators to prevent the deportation of migrants – an appalling violation of the UK’s national sovereignty.»

The U.N. Network on Migration describes the compact as «non-legally binding.» A U.N.-hosted text of the compact also says it respects states’ sovereign right to determine their national migration policies and to distinguish between regular and irregular migration status.

The declaration itself says the Global Compact is a cooperative framework and acknowledges that no state can address migration alone, while also upholding the sovereignty of states.

The department pushed back on the compact’s framing of migration as «safe, orderly and regular.»

«For the citizens of Western nations, mass migration was never safe. It introduced new security threats, imposed financial strains, and undermined the cohesion of our societies,» it wrote.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«The United States will not legitimize global compacts that enable mass migration into America or Western nations,» the post added.

U.N. materials frame the compact as a cooperative framework for issues that often cross borders, including labor migration, border management, migrant protections and development. U.N. agencies, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, describe the IMRF as a state-led review process with participation from relevant stakeholders.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the U.N. for comment.