SCOTUS Issues Redistricting Ruling That Could Impact Midterms

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a Louisiana congressional district’s boundaries relied too much on race, in a redistricting case that could impact which party controls Congress in the years ahead. 

The district is represented by Rep. Cleo Fields, a Democrat. During arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts said the district was drawn like a “snake,” as it stretches more than 200 miles.  

The ruling will affect how all state legislatures can draw their district maps.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for the court’s majority. “In sum, because the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district, no compelling interest justified the State’s use of race in creating SB8,” he wrote. SB8 was the state’s name for the new map.

“That map is an unconstitutional gerrymander, and its use would violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights,” Alito wrote.

Liberal groups have warned that the case, Louisiana v. Callais, could net Republicans up to 19 new seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, as the decision could impact parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. 

The high court heard two rounds of arguments in the case, one in March 2025, then again in October. The ustices were not ready to rule after the first round and ordered a new round of arguments to focus specifically on whether Louisiana’s intentional creation of a second black district violated the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal treatment of people under the law, or the 15th Amendment, which guarantees a citizen’s right to vote regardless of race.

The dispute began after the 2020 census when Louisiana redrew six congressional districts with just one majority-black congressional district.

The NAACP and others sued, alleging the new map resulting from the 2020 census violated Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act, which bans race-based gerrymandering of districts. 

The state had one majority-black district after the 2010 census, but the groups contend that the state’s black population grew after that, resulting in the need for a second district. 

In 2022, U.S. District Chief Judge Shelly Dick sided with the NAACP and ordered the state to redraw the map with two majority black districts. 

After the state created a new map, other state voters sued, asserting the new map violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, since the boundary lines of the second district had been drawn based on race. 

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the new map. 

Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“The consequences are likely to be far-reaching and grave. Today’s decision renders Section 2 all but a dead letter,” Kagan wrote, referring to the Voting Rights Act. “In the States where that law continues to matter—the States still marked by residential segregation and racially polarized voting—minority voters can now be cracked out of the electoral process.”

Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion, wrote Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act “does not regulate districting at all.”

“The relevant text prohibits states from imposing or applying a ‘voting qualification,’ ‘prerequisite to voting,’ or ‘standard, practice, or procedure,’ in a manner that results in a denial or abridgement of the right to vote based on race,” Thomas wrote. “How States draw district lines does not fall within any of those three categories.”

Citing past cases, he continued: “Therefore, no [Section 2] challenge to districting should ever succeed.”

This story is developing and may be updated.