The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that Louisiana’s congressional map creating a second majority-Black district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, narrowing how states can rely on race when drawing districts under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Writing for the majority, Samuel Alito said compliance with Section 2 of the law can justify consideration of race but does not require states to adopt maps that prioritize racial outcomes. He wrote that Section 2, “correctly understood,” does not impose liability that conflicts with the Constitution and did not mandate Louisiana’s redraw.
Justice Clarence Thomas joined the Court’s ruling but issued a separate opinion saying he would have gone further. Thomas argued that the Voting Rights Act should not be used to challenge how states draw congressional districts at all. He said the law is meant to protect access to the ballot, not regulate how states design district maps. He said that redistricting decisions fall outside the statute’s scope, writing that no claims under that section should succeed in future districting cases.
The case, Louisiana v. Callais, focused on whether the state’s revised map violated the 14th and 15th Amendments by elevating race in its design. The dispute followed extended litigation and two rounds of Supreme Court arguments after the state added the second majority-Black district.
The ruling leaves Section 2 in place but is expected to constrain how it is applied in future redistricting fights.
