Louisiana v. Callais (2026)

After a federal court ruled in 2022 that Louisiana's congressional map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the legislature in 2024 drew a second majority-Black district out of six, a long diagonal district linking parts of Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette, and Baton Rouge. A group of voters who described themselves as non-African American sued, arguing that the district was a racial gerrymander, and a three-judge court agreed. The Supreme Court heard argument in March 2025, then ordered reargument on whether intentionally creating a majority-minority district violates the 14th or 15th Amendment, and heard the case again on October 15, 2025.

On April 29, 2026, the Court ruled 6 to 3 that the district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander because the Voting Rights Act did not require it. The majority held that compliance with Section 2 can justify race-based districting only to remedy specific, identified past violations of the Constitution or a statute, and it updated the Thornburg v. Gingles framework, citing social change in the South, the close link between race and party, and computer mapping. Three justices dissented, warning that minority voters in segregated and racially polarized areas would lose protection against having their votes cracked.

Louisiana suspended its primary and enacted a new map in May 2026, and Alabama enacted a map eliminating the second opportunity district created after Allen v. Milligan, which the Supreme Court allowed to take effect. Analysts expected other Southern states to revisit majority-minority districts. Supporters say the ruling moves the law toward race-neutral districting and ends what they see as racial sorting of voters, while critics say it guts the main remaining protection of the Voting Rights Act and could sharply reduce Black representation in Congress.