WASHINGTON — In a landmark 6-3 decision issued on April 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana’s congressional redistricting map, which created a second majority-Black district, is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
The case, Louisiana v. Callais, centered on Senate Bill 8 (SB8), the map enacted by the Louisiana legislature in 2024. That map included two majority-Black districts out of the state’s six congressional seats, in response to earlier federal court findings that the previous map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voting strength.
Writing for the conservative majority, Justice Samuel Alito concluded that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to draw the additional majority-minority district. Without that compelling interest, the state’s use of race as the predominant factor in drawing the map violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. “That map is an unconstitutional gerrymander,” Alito wrote, “and its use would violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.”
The ruling focused on the state’s Sixth Congressional District, represented by Democrat Cleo Fields. Chief Justice John Roberts had previously described the district as a “snake” stretching more than 200 miles to connect Black communities in Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette, and Baton Rouge.
The decision effectively weakens a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that has been used for decades to create districts ensuring minority voters have an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. Civil rights groups called the ruling a “devastating blow” to protections against racial discrimination in voting.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined Justice Elena Kagan in dissent.
The practical impact is significant. Louisiana will now need to redraw its congressional map—likely returning to a version with only one majority-Black district. The ruling could also open the door for other states to challenge or eliminate similar districts, potentially shifting the balance of power in the U.S. House toward Republicans ahead of future elections.
The case stemmed from a challenge by a group of non-African American voters who argued that the map impermissibly prioritized race over traditional districting principles such as compactness and contiguity. Louisiana defended the map as a good-faith effort to comply with the Voting Rights Act following years of litigation.
Legal observers note that today’s opinion builds on the Court’s recent precedents limiting the use of race in redistricting and affirmative action, continuing a trend toward stricter scrutiny of race-conscious government actions.
The full opinion and dissents are available on the Supreme Court’s website. Louisiana officials must now move quickly to implement a new map in time for upcoming elections.
SOURCES:
Supreme Court weakens Voting Rights Act in major redistricting case, voiding Louisiana’s congressional map – CBS News
The Latest: Supreme Court weakens a key tool of the Voting Rights Act | WBEN
Louisiana v. Callais (Voting Rights Act) (24-109) | SCOTUSblog
Louisiana v. Callais
24-109 Louisiana v. Callais (04/29/2026)
