In a decision that critics say defies logic and history, the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority has effectively dismantled Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais. The ruling, handed down on Wednesday, eliminates key protections against racial gerrymandering, paving the way for districts that dilute minority voting power.
The case centered on Louisiana's congressional map, which had been challenged for packing Black voters into a single district. The state is roughly 30% Black, yet the map limited Black voters to just one out of six districts. Lower courts had found the map violated Section 2, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race.
But the Supreme Court disagreed, holding that any race-based districting—even one intended to remedy past discrimination—is unconstitutional. The majority argued that the Voting Rights Act's original purpose was to prevent discrimination, not to require race-conscious maps.
Critics say the logic is circular: the Court is using the Constitution's equal protection clause to block the very law designed to enforce equal protection. Moreover, the decision ignores basic arithmetic. In Louisiana, creating a second majority-Black district is the only way to ensure proportional representation—a remedy the Court now forbids.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing in dissent, accused the majority of "turning the Voting Rights Act on its head" and predicted the ruling would usher in a new era of voting discrimination. Civil rights groups have vowed to continue fighting, but with Section 2 effectively neutered, the path forward is unclear.
The ruling is the latest in a series of decisions chipping away at the VRA, following the 2013 Shelby County decision that gutted preclearance requirements. For voting rights advocates, Callais represents the final nail in the coffin of one of the most successful civil rights laws in American history.