Body
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that a majority-Black congressional district in Louisiana violated the Constitution because it relied too heavily on race, striking down the district under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The 6-3 decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito for the court’s conservative majority, opened the door for more redistricting disputes across the country and may give Republicans additional opportunities in the U.S. House race, with impacts that could be felt most sharply later in the decade.
Chief Justice John Roberts described the district as a “snake” map stretching more than 200 miles (320 kilometers), linking parts of Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette and Baton Rouge. In the majority opinion, Alito said the arrangement amounted to an unconstitutional gerrymander, arguing that the district’s approach to race departed from constitutional limits on how government may use race in decisionmaking.
The court’s conservatives said Section 2 could not be used to justify the district in the way it was designed. Alito wrote that “allowing race to play any part in government decisionmaking represents a departure from the constitutional rule that applies in almost every other context,” and he said the statute is effectively limited to instances of intentional discrimination, which he characterized as a very high standard.
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan argued that the ruling would undercut the Voting Rights Act’s purpose. She wrote that the court’s “gutting of Section 2 puts that achievement in peril,” and she said the upshot is that states could “without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power.” Kagan’s dissent reflected the broader concern that minority communities could face higher barriers when challenging election maps that reduce their political influence.
The Supreme Court ruling came as Louisiana faced the practical question of whether and how it would need to adjust its own redistricting plans to comply with the decision. The Associated Press reported that it was unclear how much of Section 2 remains, and that the effect of the ruling could be felt more strongly in 2028 because many deadlines for the current year’s congressional races had already passed.
Cleo Fields, the Democrat whose district was challenged, said in a statement that the decision’s “practical effect is to make it far harder for minority communities to challenge redistricting maps that dilute their political voice.” In a separate nationwide context, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in an email that the ruling was a “complete and total victory” and argued that the color of a person’s skin should not determine a congressional district.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called the ruling “appalling,” with Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington state saying it was the latest in a line of attacks by President Donald Trump and the conservative court on voting rights and on “the fundamental right of every American citizen to vote.” DelBene said Democrats were poised to regain the House majority in November “despite this corrupt and targeted assault on the voting rights of Black and Brown Americans from the Supreme Court.”
Trump praised the decision, saying it was the “kind of ruling I like.” He has helped spark a nationwide redistricting competition this year intended to strengthen Republican chances of preserving their House edge, and the ruling aligned with state and party efforts to redraw congressional lines. In Florida, for example, lawmakers debated a proposed map submitted by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis aimed at improving GOP prospects for seats in the state’s U.S. House delegation, and Republicans approved the new map after Democrats urged a delay to read the Supreme Court decision and consult lawyers.
The Louisiana case also represented a departure from how the court treated a similar issue involving Alabama less than three years earlier. That Alabama decision led to a new congressional map that sent two Black Democrats to Congress, and it prompted Louisiana lawmakers to add a second majority-Black district. About a third of Louisianans are Black, and they now form majorities in two of the state’s six congressional districts, according to the Associated Press.
Roberts has long focused on limiting the Voting Rights Act’s use of race in election matters, and the Associated Press said the chief justice had been at the center of efforts to narrow it, including in earlier opinions. In a 2006 dissent, Roberts wrote: “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race,” and in 2013 he wrote for the majority when the court limited requirements that some governments get approval before making election-related changes.
Jonathan Cervas, a political scientist at Carnegie Mellon University who has served as an outside legal expert in multiple Voting Rights Act cases, said the broader effect is likely to deepen later. He described the Voting Rights Act as a means to protect minority voters from vote dilution as “essentially dead,” barring extraordinary action, and said the most significant impacts would likely come in 2028 when Republicans potentially can replace more than a dozen Democratic-held House districts previously protected under the Voting Rights Act.