U.S. Supreme Court exterior during hearing on Louisiana redistricting under Voting Rights Act, with lawyers, protesters, and district map.
AI:n luoma kuva

Supreme Court examines Louisiana redistricting under Voting Rights Act

AI:n luoma kuva

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on October 15, 2025, in Callais v. Louisiana, a case challenging whether creating a second majority-Black congressional district violates the Constitution. Conservative justices appeared inclined to limit Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, potentially allowing Republicans to gain up to 19 House seats. The ruling could reshape minority representation in Congress.

The case stems from Louisiana's 2021 congressional map, drawn by Republican lawmakers after the 2020 census. Black voters, who comprise about one-third of the state's population, were concentrated into one majority-Black district, with the remaining five districts majority-white. This configuration gave Black Louisianans representation in only one district. In 2022, a federal court struck down the map as a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits diluting minority voting power and ensures opportunities to elect preferred candidates.

The legislature then created a new map with two majority-Black districts, which was used in the 2024 elections and helped Democrats secure a second Louisiana seat. However, a group of white voters, led by Phillip Callais, challenged it as unconstitutional racial discrimination under the 14th and 15th Amendments. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, a Republican, approved the map to comply with court orders but now argues it violates equal protection by relying on race. "We've said all along, if section two requires us to do that, then it is in conflict with the equal protection clause," Murrill told Fox News.

During arguments, Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated the VRA "entails the intentional, deliberate use of race to sort people into different districts" and suggested such remedies need a "time limit." Justice Neil Gorsuch repeatedly called the creation of a majority-Black district intentional discrimination. Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned if Section 2 exceeds the 15th Amendment by addressing discriminatory effects beyond intent. Justice Samuel Alito proposed viewing maps as partisan rather than racial gerrymanders. Justice Sonia Sotomayor countered that the logic allows race to harm but not help minorities: "You can use [race] to help yourself achieve goals that reduce a particular [racial] group’s electoral participation, but you can’t use it to remedy that situation."

The Trump Justice Department supports limiting Section 2, arguing it is no longer constitutional. Two years ago, the Court upheld the VRA in Allen v. Milligan against a similar Alabama challenge. A ruling against Section 2 could enable Republican-led states like Florida, Georgia, and Texas to redraw maps, potentially netting Republicans 15 to 19 House seats and eliminating up to 30% of the Congressional Black Caucus, per a report from Black Voters Matter Fund and Fair Fight Action. Cliff Albright of Black Voters Matter warned, "What happens in these states impacts the entire country." Louisiana Secretary of State Nancy Landry urged a decision by early January 2026 to avoid election disruptions.

Liittyvät artikkelit

Protesters and lawyers outside the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments on the future of the Voting Rights Act's Section 2.
AI:n luoma kuva

Supreme Court hears arguments on Voting Rights Act's future

Raportoinut AI AI:n luoma kuva

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Callais v. Louisiana, a case that could restrict or end Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The arguments focused on whether creating majority-minority districts violates the 14th and 15th Amendments. Civil rights advocates warn of catastrophic consequences for multiracial democracy.

Republicans' hopes for a Supreme Court decision to weaken the Voting Rights Act and enable favorable redistricting before the 2026 midterms are fading as election timelines tighten. The case, Louisiana v. Callais, could allow the GOP to redraw maps in the South to gain more congressional seats, but experts predict a ruling too late for implementation. State officials warn that changing maps now would create logistical chaos for elections.

Raportoinut AI Faktatarkistettu

Indiana’s Republican-led Senate has rejected a Trump-backed congressional map that would likely have given the GOP all nine of the state’s U.S. House seats, despite an aggressive months-long pressure campaign from the White House, even as redistricting battles elsewhere and a looming Supreme Court case shape the national landscape.

Virginia Democrats have filed an emergency motion with the state Court of Appeals to reverse a judge's ruling that halted a proposed constitutional amendment on redistricting. The amendment could reshape congressional districts to favor Democrats significantly. The legal battle centers on procedural challenges raised by Republicans during a recent special legislative session.

Raportoinut AI

Maryland's Democratic leaders have approved a proposal to redraw congressional districts, potentially eliminating the state's only Republican-held U.S. House seat ahead of the 2026 midterms. The plan, recommended by a governor-appointed commission, would reshape the 1st District to favor Democrats. While supporters cite population changes and actions in other states, critics from both parties warn of partisan overreach and legal risks.

On November 4, 2025, Californians voted on Proposition 50, a legislative constitutional amendment that would require the state to use new, legislatively drawn congressional maps through 2030 in response to Texas’s mid‑decade redistricting. Backers say the plan answers a Trump‑backed GOP push in Texas; analysts forecast it could shift as many as five U.S. House seats, though the commission would resume control in 2031.

Raportoinut AI Faktatarkistettu

Virginia Democrats’ push to redraw the state’s congressional districts has stalled amid disagreements between the House of Delegates and state Senate over competing map concepts, even as party leaders move to appeal a judge’s ruling that blocked the underlying redistricting effort.

 

 

 

Tämä verkkosivusto käyttää evästeitä

Käytämme evästeitä analyysiä varten parantaaksemme sivustoamme. Lue tietosuojakäytäntömme tietosuojakäytäntö lisätietoja varten.
Hylkää