Supreme Court Limits Use of Race in Congressional Maps, Weakening Voting Rights Act

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday handed down a landmark decision that sharply weakens a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, fundamentally shifting how states can draw congressional districts and potentially reshaping political power nationwide, according to reporting from the Nebraska Examiner.

In Louisiana v. Callais, the court's conservative majority ruled 6-3 that Louisiana's congressional map, which included a second majority-Black district, violated the Equal Protection Clause as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The decision raises the bar for using race as a remedy in redistricting, essentially requiring proof of intentional discrimination rather than examining the discriminatory effects of maps on minority voting power.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion that race-conscious redistricting can only be justified under very narrow circumstances, while Justice Elena Kagan warned in dissent that the ruling "eviscerates" Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and allows states to "discriminate with impunity" through partisan gerrymandering.

The implications extend far beyond Louisiana. Political analysts project that Republicans could gain up to 19 U.S. House seats nationally and as many as 200 state legislative seats across the South as a result of the decision. The Congressional Black Caucus could shrink by as much as one-quarter, while the Congressional Hispanic Caucus faces similar threats.

Republican-led legislatures across the country are already moving to redraw maps. U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee has called on state lawmakers to reconvene and create an additional Republican-held seat in Memphis, while Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves announced a special session to redraw state Supreme Court districts, describing the decision as one that could "forever change the way we draw electoral maps."

The timing complicates immediate action, however. Primary elections have already been held in Mississippi, North Carolina and Texas, while ballots have been distributed in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. This likely delays the major impact of the ruling until 2028, when states can pursue more aggressive redistricting ahead of the next presidential election cycle.

For Nebraska, the ruling carries limited immediate consequences, as the state's three congressional districts have majority-white populations with no majority-minority districts currently in place. However, voting rights experts warn that the decision could affect redistricting after the next decennial census in 2030.

The court's decision represents the culmination of decades of conservative legal efforts to weaken the Voting Rights Act. It follows the 2013 Shelby County decision that gutted the preclearance requirement forcing states to obtain federal approval before changing voting laws.

"It is hard to overstate what an earthquake this will be for American politics," said Rick Hasen, a UCLA law professor and election law expert, in the immediate aftermath of the ruling.