Battle over Black voter representation in Louisiana heads to Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral arguments in a case that could determine whether Louisiana will have to uphold a second majority-Black congressional district. The case more broadly will focus on the future enforcement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as it relates to how race is legally considered in the drawing of district lines around the state and beyond.

The consolidated cases, Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais, are focused on a map first crafted by the Republican-majority Louisiana state legislature in 2022 that was successfully challenged. The plaintiffs argued that the map was racially discriminatory because only one of six congressional districts was majority Black, despite the Black population making up a third of Louisiana’s population. After the map was deemed likely unconstitutional under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the state was ordered to draw a new map with a second majority-Black district.

That district, Louisiana’s 6th Congressional District, is currently represented by U.S. Rep. Cleo Fields, D-La., who is Black. Fields was elected in the November 2024 election as a result of the new map and was sworn in on Jan. 3.

However, immediately after the new map with two majority-Black districts was enacted, another lawsuit was filed, arguing that it was racially discriminatory against white voters. Now, the Supreme Court will get a chance to weigh in on the matter, either allowing the second district to remain or striking it down and requiring the state legislature to draw a new map again.

“This Court ruled just two years ago to uphold Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, so any decision coming out of this case should do the same,” said Eric Holder, former U.S. attorney general under President Barack Obama and chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. “The Voting Rights Act enshrines the right to an equal opportunity to access our political system – and for Black Louisianans, that means having two congressional districts where their voices can be meaningfully heard. Anything short of that would be a textbook violation of that law.”

Holder continued, “This absurd challenge to Louisiana’s fair map presents the same arguments as the anti-civil rights coalition did to prevent the enactment and reauthorizations of the Voting Rights Act a generation ago.” He added, “In moments like this, it is the duty of the courts to protect the rights of American citizens, and in this case, the Supreme Court must reinstate Louisiana’s Voting Rights Act-compliant map.” 

The legal teeth of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibits racial discrimination in access to voting, have been gradually weakened over the years. In 2013, when the Supreme Court struck down the preclearance provision, Section 5, in Shelby County v. Holder, which required states in the South with a history of racially discriminatory voting laws to first get federal approval before enacting new laws. In 2023, a ruling from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals raised the threshold for when civil rights groups can challenge voting laws on behalf of Black voters.

Civil rights leaders have long decried the rulings from federal courts, saying they have opened the door to more barriers to voting access for Black and brown voters created by partisan Republican lawmakers.

“This case isn’t just about a congressional map. It’s about representation and living up to the fundamental ideal that should guide our democracy: that every individual has the right to exercise self-determination at the ballot box,” said Marina Jenkins, executive director at National Redistricting Foundation.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2023, which allowed Alabama to move forward with a new map with a second Black-majority district, gives advocates hope in the Louisiana case. In Allen v. Milliagn, the high court ruled that a map excluding the second district diluted the voting power of Black residents.

“It would be a head-spinning reversal of its own precedent,” said Jenkins if the Supreme Court was to rule against Louisiana’s second majority-Black district. She added, “This should be a straightforward decision for the Court…The State of Louisiana chose how to meet that requirement within their own political prerogatives. That should be the end of the story.”