Major Supreme Court Case: Louisiana Congressional Map and the Voting Rights Act
The Supreme Court, with a conservative majority, is considering whether to significantly weaken a key part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The case centers on Louisiana’s congressional map, which was required to be redrawn to include two majority-Black districts (since about a third of the state’s population is Black), but now faces a challenge over whether creating majority-Black districts by considering race violates the Constitution’s 14th and 15th Amendments.
After expanding the scope of the case, the Court will decide whether states are ever allowed to consider race when drawing legislative districts to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which was enacted to protect minority voters from discrimination. Conservatives argue the Constitution prohibits considering race at all, echoing the Court’s recent embrace of a “colorblind” reading of law, such as its 2023 decision barring race-conscious college admissions.
Louisiana has changed sides to support the challenge against race-based district drawing, and the Trump administration also backs this position. Civil rights groups are defending the current map.
A ruling against the use of race in districting would make it harder for states to create minority-majority districts, likely reducing the number of minority lawmakers and potentially helping Republicans in future elections. The Supreme Court’s earlier decisions have already weakened the Voting Rights Act, though a 2023 ruling surprisingly upheld the need to consider race in some circumstances.
A quick decision could allow states to redraw district lines before the 2026 elections, significantly affecting political representation and control.
Aftermath of 2023 VRA Decision
After narrowly preserving the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in 2023, the Supreme Court now signals it may dramatically restrict or further dismantle VRA protections, especially regarding race-based redistricting.
Key Case: Louisiana v. Callais
The Louisiana case challenges the use of race in creating congressional districts. The justices are considering whether VRA remedies tied to race might violate the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.
Potential National Impact
The impending decision could reshape congressional and legislative redistricting nationwide, directly affecting minority representation and potentially making it easier for Republicans to win more districts in the South by eliminating majority-Black districts.
Section 2 at Risk
The core issue is the future of Section 2 of the VRA, which prohibits voting practices that result in racial minorities having less opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. Conservatives argue for limiting or ending its race-based remedies.
Court’s Conservative Majority
Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett have pushed to end race-based remedies; Kavanaugh has questioned their ongoing necessity, and John Roberts authored key past decisions weakening the VRA.
Changing Legal Arguments
Louisiana’s state officials have reversed course, now asserting that “race-based redistricting is fundamentally contrary to the Constitution,” while the Trump administration urges judges to require proof of intentional discrimination, not just disparate impact.
Broader Backdrop
This move follows a decade of the Supreme Court weakening the VRA, including the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision that struck down pre-clearance requirements for states with racist histories.
Liberal Opposition
Justice Elena Kagan and minority and civil rights groups warn that ending or gutting Section 2 would return the country to an era of widespread exclusion of minorities from political representation.
2026 and Beyond
The outcome may determine redistricting boundaries in Louisiana’s 2026 midterm elections and influence similar battles across the country amid ongoing partisan gerrymandering efforts.
Precedent and Uncertainty
Chief Justice Roberts’ 2023 majority to preserve Section 2 was fragile, with Kavanaugh not fully endorsing race-conscious districting. The current case’s unusual re-argument signals the possibility of a far-reaching and potentially adverse decision for the VRA.
Summary
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appears ready to sharply restrict or eliminate race-based protections under the Voting Rights Act, focusing on a Louisiana case with nationwide implications for minority voting power and future political representation.
Validated Sources
- Supreme Court Docket: Louisiana v. Callais
- Voting Rights Act of 1965 – U.S. Department of Justice
- Shelby County v. Holder (2013) – Supreme Court Decision
- NPR: Supreme Court to Decide Future of Voting Rights Act
- New York Times: Supreme Court Signals Major Shift on Voting Rights
- SCOTUSblog: Analysis of Louisiana Redistricting Case