Redistricting Maps Unconstitutional?

quote:

---

The Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais concerns the state's congressional map, specifically the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. The central question is whether drawing this district violates the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments by constituting an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The case will determine the future scope of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and whether states can create majority-minority districts as a remedy for racial vote dilution.
Background: Louisiana redrew its congressional map to include a second majority-Black district after a lower court found the previous map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A group of non-African American voters then sued, arguing the new map was a racial gerrymander.
Central Issue: The case asks the Supreme Court to decide if creating a majority-minority district, even if it is a remedy for past discrimination, is permissible under the Constitution. Louisiana's argument is that all "race-based redistricting is unconstitutional," according to the Brennan Center for Justice.
Legal Arguments: The core of the dispute is the conflict between the Voting Rights Act's requirement to prevent racial vote dilution and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The case will explore if the VRA's redistricting requirements are limited by the Constitution, a question that could have nationwide implications.
Court Proceedings: The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case in October 2025. A ruling is expected to be issued by the court, potentially impacting upcoming elections and future redistricting cases across the country.

---