Courts have the luxury of time. Election officials do not.

Earlier this week, “the Supreme Court allowed Alabama to move forward with its new congressional map in a decision issued Tuesday evening, pausing a lower-court ruling that the map was likely unconstitutional.”

In doing so, the Court reiterated a principle that often gets overlooked in redistricting debates. As The Hill reported, the justices wrote that "federal courts should not impose changes close to an election" and that states are "free to decide for themselves whether last-minute changes to an election are in their best interests."

Days earlier, Louisiana lawmakers approved a new congressional map following the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais. The state had already redrawn its congressional districts after years of litigation, only to find itself revisiting the map once again after the Court’s latest ruling.

The details of those cases differ. The lesson does not.

Election calendars continue regardless of whether litigation is finished or not.

The Constitution places........

© Townhall