Supreme Court limits use of race in redistricting

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Wednesday that states can almost never consider race when drawing electoral maps to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

In the decision striking down Louisiana’s voting map, the conservative majority found lawmakers illegally used race as the predominant factor to create a new majority-black district.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that the court preserved a central tenet of the Voting Rights Act but that Louisiana committed “an unconstitutional gerrymander” by aiming for a district with a majority of black voters.

The case, Louisiana v. Callais, stemmed from the 2020 census. Black Louisianans make up about one-third of the state population, yet only one of six congressional districts was majority-black under the prior map.

After black voters sued, state lawmakers adopted a new map adding a second majority-black district that snaked diagonally across the state. White voters challenged it as an illegal racial gerrymander. Lawmakers defended the shape as politically motivated to protect high-profile Republicans including House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Justice Elena Kagan dissented sharply and read her opinion from the bench, a rare step. She warned the ruling’s practical effect “will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity” by making it nearly impossible to use race when drawing voting maps.

The decision marks the latest in a series of rulings weakening the 1965 Voting Rights Act. It could allow Republican state legislatures to eliminate around a dozen majority-minority House seats held by Democrats across the South.

It remains unclear how the ruling will affect the current midterm redistricting battles, though Louisiana will likely lose one Democratic district and states such as Florida and Tennessee may redraw maps citing the decision. Any new maps eliminating majority-minority districts would likely trigger fresh litigation.