Supreme Court Seems Inclined to Limit Race-Based Electoral Districts/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to limit the use of race in drawing congressional districts, casting doubt on a Louisiana map with two Black-majority districts. Justices signaled a shift that could weaken the Voting Rights Act’s protections against racial gerrymandering. The decision could impact redistricting nationwide and reshape congressional power.
Voting Rights Act Challenge: Quick Looks
- Supreme Court hears Louisiana case challenging race-based districting
- Conservative justices skeptical of creating Black-majority districts
- Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh shift from prior 2023 ruling
- Court may limit or strike Section 2 of the VRA
- Decision could enable GOP-led redistricting across the South
- Justices question if race-based districts are still constitutional
- Democrats warn of voter discrimination rollback
- Redrawn Louisiana map challenged by white voters
- Ruling may reshape House representation, especially for minorities
- Legal arguments focus on 14th and 15th Amendments
Deep Look: Supreme Court Poised to Scale Back Race-Based Districts Under Voting Rights Act
WASHINGTON — October 15, 2025
In a case with far-reaching consequences for U.S. elections, the Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may limit or eliminate the use of race as a factor in drawing congressional districts, casting doubt on a Louisiana redistricting plan designed to create two majority-Black districts.
During oral arguments, the court’s six conservative justices expressed deep skepticism toward the use of race in redistricting under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) — the law’s key provision for protecting minority voters.
If the court rules in favor of Louisiana’s Republican-led legislature, the decision could weaken federal voting protections, allow partisan gerrymandering to go unchecked, and ultimately reshape how power is distributed in Congress — particularly in Southern states with large Black and Latino populations.
“This could fundamentally alter the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act,” said Janai Nelson, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, who argued before the Court.
The Case at a Glance
At issue is whether Louisiana’s creation of a second majority-Black congressional district — which spans more than 200 miles across cities like Shreveport, Baton Rouge, Alexandria, and Lafayette — violated the Constitution by relying too heavily on race.
The state originally drew just one Black-majority district after the 2020 census, maintaining its Republican-dominated structure of five white-majority districts and one Black-majority seat. Civil rights advocates sued, and a lower court ruled that the map violated Section 2 by failing to reflect the state’s one-third Black population.
Following the ruling, Louisiana revised its map to include a second majority-Black district. That district elected Democratic Rep. Cleo Fields last year. But white voters in a separate lawsuit argued the new map used race as the predominant factor — and a three-judge panel agreed.
Now the Supreme Court will decide whether using race in this way violates the 14th and 15th Amendments, which bar racial discrimination but are often invoked to challenge affirmative action and race-based policies.
Justices Signal a Major Shift
Although the Supreme Court upheld a similar Alabama redistricting case in 2023 — with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining the liberal wing — both justices signaled a different stance on Wednesday.
Roberts implied that the Alabama case was “fact-specific” and shouldn’t dictate outcomes in other states. Kavanaugh went further, asking whether it’s time to end the practice of using race in district maps altogether, saying, “Are we going to allow this to extend forever?”
Their tone contrasted sharply with Justice Elena Kagan, who defended the Voting Rights Act’s historical role. “This only comes into play if there’s a specific, proven violation of the law,” she noted.
The conservative justices’ posture fits a broader pattern. Over the last decade, the Court has:
- Struck down the VRA’s preclearance provision in 2013 (Shelby County v. Holder)
- Ended affirmative action in higher education in 2023
- Given state legislatures wide leeway to gerrymander for political reasons
Now, with race-based redistricting under fire, Section 2 could be the next pillar of civil rights law to fall.
National Implications
The timing is pivotal. Across the country, Republican-led legislatures — encouraged by former President Donald Trump — are initiating mid-decade redistricting to strengthen GOP control in the U.S. House.
If the court weakens Section 2, states would have no federal obligation to draw districts that reflect racial demographics, leading to maps that favor whichever party controls the statehouse.
In the 2023 Alabama decision, the court’s ruling led to the creation of new congressional districts in both Alabama and Louisiana, sending two additional Black Democrats to Congress.
A reversal in the Louisiana case could end that momentum and allow GOP legislatures to redraw maps that dilute minority representation — especially in swing states like Georgia, Texas, and Florida.
The Constitutional Debate
The key legal question now is: Does intentionally creating a majority-minority district inherently violate the Constitution’s ban on race-based government action?
Supporters argue that Section 2 remedies historical discrimination by ensuring Black voters can elect representatives of their choice.
Critics claim it enshrines racial preferences and violates the principle of race neutrality enshrined in the Constitution.
As Chief Justice Roberts once wrote, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
That philosophy may now drive the Court to reinterpret or even dismantle Section 2, significantly weakening the Voting Rights Act just as 2026 midterm redistricting battles loom.
What Comes Next?
The court is expected to issue a ruling in early 2026 — one that could reshape the political landscape nationwide, especially in states with large minority populations and partisan power struggles.
With stakes this high, civil rights groups and political strategists are bracing for one of the most consequential decisions affecting U.S. democracy since the original passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.