Supreme Court Rules on Race in Congressional Redistricting

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday in Louisiana v. Callais that the Voting Rights Act permits consideration of race in redistricting only to remedy proven intentional discrimination in voting practices. " The decision reversed a lower court order that had required Louisiana to redraw its congressional map to include a second majority-Black district.

The ruling cited the Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down the Voting Rights Act's preclearance formula for certain states, noting that "things have changed dramatically" since the law's enactment in 1965.

The case originated from a challenge by Black voters in Robinson v. Landry, who argued that Louisiana's initial congressional map, with one majority-Black district out of six despite Black residents comprising about one-third of the population, violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

A federal district court agreed and ordered a new map with a second majority-Black district connecting areas from Baton Rouge to Shreveport. Non-Black voters then filed suit in Callais, claiming the revised map constituted an impermissible racial gerrymander.

Justice Alito's opinion emphasized that Section 2 "does not authorize courts to redraw districts solely to achieve proportional representation based on race," and referenced the 2019 ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause, which held that federal courts cannot review claims of partisan gerrymandering absent racial discrimination.

Justice Clarence Thomas concurred separately, describing the Court's prior Voting Rights Act jurisprudence as a "disastrous misadventure" that should now end. Dissenting, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the majority's decision "renders Section 2 all but a dead letter," arguing it completes the "demolition" of the Voting Rights Act begun in Shelby County.

The dissent highlighted ongoing racial polarization in Southern voting, where Black voters predominantly support Democrats and white voters support Republicans.

Following the ruling, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry announced the suspension of the state's congressional primaries to allow for map revisions. The decision prompted responses in other states, including calls from officials in Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, and Mississippi to convene special sessions for redistricting.

" Press Robinson, a plaintiff in the original Robinson v.

Civil rights groups, including those cited by NPR, expressed concern that the ruling could reduce Black representation in Congress and at state and local levels. No official statements from the U.S. Department of Justice on the ruling were reported in available sources as of May 3, 2026.

The decision caused delays in Louisiana's primaries, leading to voter confusion on the first day of early voting, as reported by The New York Times. The Voting Rights Act, enacted in 1965 under President Lyndon B. Johnson, originally included preclearance requirements amended in 1982 to address effects of dilution without proving intent.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in the 2013 Shelby County opinion, described the preclearance formula as outdated due to increases in Black voter turnout and elected officials.