The Supreme Court on Monday grappled with whether or not to send Louisiana legislators back to the drawing board in a high-stakes dispute over the Voting Rights Act and an election map with two majority-black U.S. congressional districts — which the state’s Republican leaders want to keep.
The state’s current map, which was used in the 2024 election, was drawn after two lower courts found an earlier version with only one majority-black district had violated Section 2 of the VRA by disenfranchising minority voters, who make up more than a third of the state’s population. The layout of Louisiana’s congressional districts could have potential implications for the 2026 midterm elections.
“We’d rather not be back at this podium defending a new map this fall,” Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguinaga told the justices on Monday.
The Supreme Court in Washington, June 30, 2024.
Susan Walsh/AP
Aguinaga said the state was happy with the ultimate layout of six congressional districts — four of which are held by Republicans, two by Democrats — because it protected key Republican incumbents, including House Speaker Mike Johnson.
“We’re in the business of complying with federal court decisions,” Aguinaga said. “When they said ‘draw a second majority-black,’ that’s what we did.”
Welcome to Louisiana sign.
Grandriver/Getty Images
A group of non-black voters sued the state, alleging the Louisiana legislator’s use of race to draw a second majority-black district — as ordered by the courts — violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, which ensures that everyone is treated equally under the law. They won a favorable decision from a different district court, which wants the state to start over again.
Much of the oral argument in the case, Louisiana v. Callais, focused on how a state was supposed to comply with competing demands from the law — balancing respect for the VRA and rights of minority voters with the command from the Constitution that treatment of Americans be race-blind.
The Supreme Court has previously given states significant breathing room to comply with the Voting Rights Act. Its rulings have also said race cannot “predominate” as a factor in how election maps are drawn, but that politics is a permissible factor.
Several justices indicated that Louisiana’s map should stand precisely because it was following court orders.
“Having a likely Voting Rights Act violation [as the two lower courts initially found], you don’t need to engage in the thought process of what if the court order is wrong,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “It seems to me Louisiana had to follow it.”
Justice Samuel Alito suggested the high court should scrutinize the lower court mandates that the state create a second majority-black district in the first place. He voiced skepticism that it was necessary.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, frequently a swing vote in close cases, suggested that he believes the use of race in any map drawing should have an expiration date.
“In our Equal Protection law, the court has said race-based remedial action must have an end point,” Kavanaugh said. “How does that apply to Section 2 [of the Voting Rights Act]?”
The decision in the case could have consequences for who controls power in Washington.
Republicans have a razor-thin majority in the House, which means every single seat could be key to the balance of power after the 2026 midterm elections.
A decision is expected by the end of June.
