The Supreme Court’s April 2026 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais significantly weakens Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, making it harder to challenge voting maps that dilute Black voting power. By striking down a second majority-Black district in Louisiana, the decision enables states to prioritize partisan gerrymandering over racial equity, likely reducing Black representation in Congress and state legislatures. (Brennan Center for Justice)
In Callais v. Louisiana, the court said Section 2 violations require a “strong inference” of intentional discrimination, not just evidence that a system disadvantages minority voters. That significantly raises the bar for plaintiffs and opens the door for states to push and defend maps that reduce the power of Black and brown voters and that would have previously faced serious legal hurdles. (Democracy Docket)
The ruling allows states to defend maps that hurt minority voters by claiming they are drawn for partisan, not racial, reasons.
Partisan gerrymandering has time and again been used as a cover for racial discrimination. And the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais could open the floodgates for more of the underhanded manipulation and voter dilution we’ve seen play out time and again in Black communities and other communities of color. Louisiana v. Callais has always been about equal representation, but the outcome in this case will reverberate through redistricting law nationwide. While in name the Court majority has upheld the test to prove racial discrimination, they have made partisan goals a wholesale defense for racism. (Legal Defense Fund)
As a result of the Voting Rights Act, the number of majority-minority districts increased, the number of non-white representatives in Congress rose accordingly…The surge in Black and Hispanic representation after the 1990s redistricting cycle was particularly notable, as many states were required to draw majority-minority districts for the first time. It is also noteworthy that, in the current House, Black representation is roughly proportional to Black population (both at approximately 14%), whereas Hispanic representation is still further from reflecting the size of that population (11% compared to 20%).
In the current Congress, 82% of all majority-minority districts are held by Democrats.
Callais significantly weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by limiting the ability to challenge discriminatory voting maps, making it easier to redraw districts that dilute minority voting power. This ruling threatens to reduce representation for Black voters and other communities of color, particularly in the South, by allowing partisan goals to justify racial dilution, likely decreasing the number of minority-held seats. (Brennan Center for Justice)
An NPR analysis estimates that at least 15 districts—all currently held by Democrats—could be redrawn to favor Republicans following the Callais decision. Due to the strong correlation between race and partisanship in the U.S., where Black voters overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates on average, the court’s ruling undermining Section 2 will likely provide a strategic advantage to the GOP. (Brookings)
Key Impacts on Representation and Turnout:
- Reduced Minority Representation: By allowing states to strike down majority-minority districts (like in Louisiana), the ruling hinders the ability to elect candidates of choice, particularly impacting Black representation in Congress and at local levels.
- Weakened Legal Protections: The Supreme Court ruling makes it much harder to challenge maps that dilute the voting power of communities of color.
- Increased Partisan Gerrymandering: The decision allows states to use partisan advantage as a defense for creating maps that decrease minority political influence.
- Turnout Consequences: With diminished political power and fewer competitive districts, legal experts warn that the “turnout gap” between minority and white voters, which was partially closed by the Voting Rights Act, could widen.
- Broad Impact: The ruling affects not just Congress, but local governance, including school boards and city councils where at-large systems might be reinstated. (Brennan Center for Justice)
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court gutting the Voting Rights Act (VRA), another set of laws is also in danger: state-level statutes that seek to bar racially discriminatory voting practices.
The DOJ seems to be interpreting the Supreme Court’s decision as also invalidating state VRAs — and that interpretation could be correct.
Currently, nine states — all Democratic-leaning — have their own VRA laws. The laws have broadly increased minority representation and participation in local government, chiefly by targeting the use of at-large election systems to discriminatorily dilute the voting power of minorities in local races.
Many observers rightly warn that Callais threatens minority representation in Congress. But minority voters’ power on school boards and city councils is no less consequential, and may be at even greater risk. For nearly half a century, the civil rights law was incredibly effective in blocking discriminatory policies in counties and towns that might otherwise escape media attention—or whose small populations might lead civil rights organizations to focus scarce litigation resources elsewhere. Minority voting power will now be diluted—not only at the national and state levels, but also at local levels—county and town seats–and school boards. (Brennan Center for Justice)
In Indiana, state officials are already using Callais to try to dismantle a voting rights case outright — offering one of the clearest early examples of how the nationwide ruling is devastating local Section 2 claims.
The lawsuit challenges Indiana’s system of appointing some judges in certain counties rather than electing them, arguing the policy reduces opportunities for Black voters to elect candidates of their choice.
In a new filing, state defendants argued that the plaintiffs’ claims fail under the Supreme Court’s updated interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, pointing to Callais as controlling authority. They contend that Section 2 applies only in narrow circumstances and does not cover the kind of claims at issue in the case — a sweeping argument that, if accepted, could bar similar challenges moving forward.
Just so far…
The Tennessee legislature has already turned all its congressional districts into white-majority districts. Now, Black voters in Tennessee — who comprise nearly 30 percent of the state’s population — have no voice.
The state used census maps to redistrict. Those maps identify people by race but not by political party. This could be sufficient evidence of intent to racially gerrymander — the Supreme Court’s new test under the Voting Rights Act. Intent is incredibly difficult to prove, however. (Robert Reich)
And more (Democracy Docket)
- Louisiana: At 4:30 a.m. on May 13., a Louisiana Senate committee voted 4-3 to advance a congressional map that would eliminate the state’s second majority-Black district, leaving it with only one. The measure now heads to the Senate floor, where it’s expected to get a vote tomorrow.
- South Carolina: Gov. Henry McMaster (R) is expected to call a special session to redraw the congressional map after the Senate rejected a redistricting measure pushed by President Donald Trump. The move would reopen a path for Republicans to target the state’s only blue seat and lone majority-Black district.
- Mississippi: Gov. Tate Reeves (R) said Republicans are planning to redraw congressional lines and vowed to eliminate the state’s sole majority-Black district by 2027.
- Georgia: Gov. Brian Kemp (R) called a special session for June 17 to redistrict congressional and legislative maps for 2028 elections. “There is an extreme movement in this country that will stop at nothing to hold on to power, even if it means stripping representation away from millions,” Sen. Raphael Warnock (D) said in response.
- Tennessee: Republicans stripped Democrats from committees. The move appears to punish the entire Democratic caucus for its resistance to the gerrymander conducted last week — and, according to state Rep. Justin Pearson (D), removes every Black elected official in the Tennessee legislature from the committees they served on.
- Maryland: State Senate President Bill Ferguson (D) opposed efforts to redraw Maryland’s map last year to counter GOP gerrymanders. But now he’s apparently talking to allies about potential redistricting options.
- New Jersey: Redistricting in 2028 is on the table.
What We Do Now
We will continue to fight for the future of our multiracial democracy. The work will be more challenging due to this decision, but we were built for this moment. Democracy will not fall on our watch. We will demand new legislation to protect voters and continue to fight to defend and advance civil rights for all people and to protect our democracy as our institutions continue to fail us. This fight will continue in the courts, in statehouses, in the streets and most importantly at the ballot box until the promise of our multiracial democracy is realized. What the Court did not do and cannot do is take away our fundamental right to vote, and it is incumbent on every American to exercise that right now more than ever in service of our democracy.
We must fight in the legislatures, in the courts, and at the ballot box for the future of our multiracial democracy.
The biggest bloc of middle and working class voters are Black people. When Republicans strip Black people’s political power away, it doesn’t just strip one community of power. It strips political power from every single middle and working class person and hands it over to billionaires and big corporations. That’s what redistricting means for you. (Georgia’s Minority Leader Harold Jones II)
Republicans have to gerrymander because they can’t win the hearts and minds of enough voters outright. This is the point we should be reinforcing when we talk with friends and family about this race to the bottom. None of this would be necessary if Republicans believed they could win the midterm elections on the merits. But they don’t, and they know it. That’s why we’re seeing all the gamesmanship. That’s why they’re diluting Black voting power. Because they know what the House could look like after November if Americans are allowed to vote in a fair election. That makes our mission pretty clear. We all know what we need to do: vote in record numbers. Vote to hold onto our democracy in the face of people who are only interesting in holding onto power. (Civil Discourse)
