The case is known as Louisiana v. Callais, and the Supreme Court heard arguments about it on Wednesday. It appears the Supreme Court seems inclined to limit race-based electoral districts under the Voting Rights Act, reports the AP.
Gerard Filitti, senior counsel at The Lawfare Project, talked to American Family Radio (AFR) regarding the case. According to him, when Louisiana redistricted in 2022, they created one majority-minority district that heavily favored black residents. However, it was challenged that it was not sufficient enough.
"They wanted more districts that were minority oriented. By 2024, they created another district, and that was challenged by a group of self-described non-African Americans, who believe that the redistricting process was racist because it favored black residents," states Filitti.
The case was heard in the Supreme Court's previous term, but it was reargued this week because Chief Justice John Roberts wanted more briefing on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. He was determining whether the use of race as the predominate factor in redistricting is something that needs to continue or is problematic under the 14th and 15th Amendments.
Amy Swearer is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. She talked about this on NewsNation, which was posted on X, and said that it does appear to be that way.
"It seems as though the Court is a bit likely to roll back some of the precedents, in terms of the ways that courts have looked at how much we allow race to play a role in creating these congressional districts," says Swearer.
Swearer thinks that, overall, this is a good thing. She believes that a “catch-22” has been created with the Voting Rights Act and how the courts have interpreted it verses the Equal Protection Clause.
"Do states have to discriminate under the Voting Rights Act? Do they have to, essentially, racially gerrymander these districts in favor of black majority districts? Or, as the Constitution by its plain wording and intent suggests, is racial gerrymandering prohibited?” asks Swearer. “Is the equal protection of the laws, regardless of race and irrespective or race, still fundamentally part of our Constitution?"
A decision may not come until the end of the term, which is scheduled for June 2026.
"I think at the end of the day the Court is taking a serious look at this and seems poised to roll back and limit the extent to which race can be taken into account," concluded Swearer.
Predictions do not always come true. In 2012, for example, news outlets ran stories saying that it appeared the Supreme Court would overturn the Affordable Care Act or 'Obamacare.' The Court later upheld the law. Still, this is a different Supreme Court today, with new justices that were confirmed in the last few years.
