Overview
The Supreme Court is one decision away from gutting what remains of the Voting Rights Act. A pending ruling in Louisiana v. Callais could eliminate at least 15 House seats currently held by Black members of Congress—the largest-ever single decline in Black representation. The case turns on whether states can consider race when drawing districts to prevent vote dilution, with the Court's conservative majority signaling they view such efforts as unconstitutional discrimination against white voters.
This is the culmination of a 13-year campaign that began with Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, which killed the Act's preclearance requirement. Section 2—the last meaningful enforcement mechanism—survived that ruling. But Louisiana v. Callais, argued twice before the Court in 2025, directly challenges whether Section 2 itself violates the Constitution. If the justices rule that creating majority-minority districts is racial gerrymandering, Republican-controlled state legislatures could redraw maps across the South, erasing not just congressional seats but close to 200 state legislative districts representing Black communities.
Related Media
Images from Openverse under Creative Commons licenses.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
The nation's first civil rights law organization, founded by Thurgood Marshall, fighting to secure racial justice through litigation and advocacy.
Founded in 1971 following the Voting Rights Act, the CBC represents Black members of Congress and advocates for communities of color.
Voting rights organization fighting voter suppression and advocating for election reform, particularly in the South.
Louisiana's lawmaking body, controlled by Republicans who drew the contested congressional maps.
Timeline
-
NPR Analysis Shows 15 Congressional Seats at Risk
AnalysisNPR publishes analysis revealing potential largest-ever decline in Black congressional representation if Court rules against Section 2.
-
Louisiana to Use Existing Map for 2026 Midterms
PoliticalAfter Supreme Court declined to issue expedited ruling by year-end 2025, Louisiana confirmed it will use existing congressional map with two majority-Black districts for 2026 midterm elections. Republican legislators had pushed back election deadlines hoping for a ruling that would allow redrawing districts before the election.
-
Second Oral Arguments Signal Conservative Majority
LegalJanai Nelson argues her first Supreme Court case; conservative justices appear inclined to restrict Section 2 protections.
-
Court Adds Constitutional Question
LegalJustices direct parties to brief whether creating majority-minority districts violates 14th or 15th Amendment.
-
First Oral Arguments in Louisiana v. Callais
LegalSupreme Court hears case but declines to rule, instead ordering reargument with new constitutional question.
-
Two Black Women Elected to Senate
PoliticalLisa Blunt Rochester and Angela Alsobrooks win Senate seats, first time two Black women will serve simultaneously.
-
White Voters Challenge Remedial Map
LegalGroup calling themselves 'non-African-American voters' sue, claiming second majority-Black district is unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.
-
Louisiana Creates Second Majority-Black District
PolicyLegislature holds special session and draws new map with two majority-Black districts to comply with court order.
-
Allen v. Milligan Reaffirms Section 2
LegalSupreme Court unexpectedly upholds Section 2 in Alabama redistricting case, requiring second majority-Black district.
-
District Court Rules for Black Voters
LegalFederal court finds Louisiana's map likely violates Section 2, orders creation of second majority-Black district.
-
Black Voters Sue Louisiana
LegalDr. Press Robinson and other Black voters, with NAACP Louisiana State Conference and Power Coalition, file Robinson v. Landry.
-
Louisiana Passes Challenged Congressional Map
PolicyLouisiana Legislature enacts map with one majority-Black district despite 33% Black population, prompting immediate legal challenge.
-
Brnovich v. DNC Weakens Section 2
LegalSupreme Court makes it harder to challenge discriminatory voting rules under Section 2, narrowing the law's application.
-
Shelby County v. Holder Guts Preclearance
LegalSupreme Court strikes down Section 4's coverage formula, effectively ending preclearance requirement for jurisdictions with discrimination history.
-
Texas Implements Restrictive Voter ID Law
PolicyHours after Shelby County decision, Texas announces implementation of strict voter ID law previously blocked by preclearance.
-
Shaw v. Reno Creates Racial Gerrymandering Doctrine
LegalSupreme Court rules that districts drawn primarily on race can violate equal protection, creating tension with Voting Rights Act.
-
Thornburg v. Gingles Decided
LegalSupreme Court establishes framework for proving vote dilution under Section 2, enabling creation of majority-minority districts.
-
Congress Amends Section 2
LegislationCongress strengthens Section 2 with bipartisan support, allowing challenges based on discriminatory effect, not just intent.
-
Congressional Black Caucus Founded
PoliticalThirteen Black members of Congress establish the CBC during surge in Black representation following the Voting Rights Act.
-
Voting Rights Act Signed into Law
LegislationPresident Johnson signs the Voting Rights Act, banning discriminatory voting practices and requiring federal preclearance for changes in covered jurisdictions.
Scenarios
Supreme Court Strikes Down Section 2 Redistricting Remedies
Discussed by: Voting rights advocates and civil rights organizations, based on conservative justices' questions during October 2025 oral arguments
The Court rules that intentionally creating majority-minority districts violates the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, regardless of Section 2 requirements. Republican state legislatures immediately begin redrawing maps across the South, eliminating majority-Black districts in favor of 'race-neutral' maps that pack Black voters into fewer districts or crack them across multiple districts. Within one redistricting cycle, 15 Congressional Black Caucus seats disappear, along with 200 state legislative seats. The Voting Rights Act becomes largely unenforceable, as Section 2 can no longer require the remedy it was designed to provide. Some Democratic states attempt to maintain minority representation through 'communities of interest' arguments, but most succeed only partially.
Court Issues Narrow Ruling That Preserves Section 2 With Limits
Discussed by: Some legal scholars who note Chief Justice Roberts' past preference for incremental rulings rather than sweeping changes
The Court issues a split decision that doesn't kill Section 2 entirely but imposes new restrictions on when race can be considered in redistricting. The ruling might require states to prove that race-neutral redistricting is impossible before drawing majority-minority districts, or establish a higher bar for demonstrating vote dilution. Some congressional districts survive, but the chilling effect causes states to avoid creating new majority-minority districts. The Congressional Black Caucus loses 5-8 seats over the next decade rather than 15 immediately. Litigation over every district becomes more complex and expensive, effectively weakening Section 2 through death by a thousand cuts.
Surprise Ruling Upholds Section 2, Following Allen v. Milligan
Discussed by: Optimistic voting rights advocates pointing to the Court's 2023 Allen v. Milligan decision that unexpectedly preserved Section 2
The Court rules that Section 2's requirement to create majority-minority districts does not violate the Constitution when backed by evidence of racial polarization in voting and a history of discrimination. Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Kavanaugh joins the three liberal justices plus Justice Barrett to form a 5-4 majority, similar to the Allen coalition. The decision reaffirms that remedying past discrimination is a compelling government interest that justifies race-conscious redistricting. Congressional Black Caucus seats remain protected, and states must continue considering race where necessary to prevent vote dilution. However, given the aggressive reargument question and oral argument signals, most observers view this outcome as unlikely.
Historical Context
Reconstruction and the First Retreat from Black Representation
1870-1901What Happened
Following the Civil War, approximately 16 Black men were elected to the U.S. House and 2 to the Senate during Reconstruction, including Hiram Revels and Blanche K. Bruce. But when federal troops withdrew from the South in 1877, Southern states implemented poll taxes, literacy tests, and violence to disenfranchise Black voters. By 1901, George Henry White left Congress as the last Black congressman from the South. No African Americans served in Congress from 1901 to 1928.
Outcome
Short term: Complete elimination of Black representation from the South for nearly three decades.
Long term: Jim Crow regime lasted until the civil rights movement and Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Why It's Relevant
This is the only historical precedent for a decline in Black congressional representation of the magnitude now threatened. If the Court eliminates 15 CBC seats, it would be the largest single drop in Black representation since the post-Reconstruction collapse—potentially signaling a second retreat from multiracial democracy in the South.
Shelby County v. Holder and Immediate Backlash
2013What Happened
The Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which identified jurisdictions with histories of discrimination that needed federal preclearance before changing voting laws. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that discrimination had diminished enough that the formula was outdated. Within hours, Texas announced it would implement a strict voter ID law that had been blocked. Other states quickly followed with new restrictions.
Outcome
Short term: Wave of new voter ID laws, polling place closures, and registration restrictions in formerly covered jurisdictions.
Long term: Section 2 litigation became the only remaining enforcement mechanism, requiring case-by-case lawsuits rather than preventive federal review.
Why It's Relevant
Shelby County killed the Voting Rights Act's preventive tool; Louisiana v. Callais targets its remedial tool. Together, they would dismantle the entire enforcement architecture of the law that enabled modern Black political representation.
Shaw v. Reno and the Racial Gerrymandering Doctrine
1993What Happened
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that North Carolina's 12th congressional district—a serpentine, 160-mile-long district drawn to create a second majority-Black district—could violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause because race appeared to be the predominant factor in drawing it. Justice O'Connor wrote that racial classifications are 'antithetical to the Fourteenth Amendment' even when used to benefit minority voters.
Outcome
Short term: Created legal tension between VRA requirement to prevent vote dilution and equal protection prohibition on race-based classifications.
Long term: States gained ability to challenge majority-minority districts as racial gerrymandering, limiting VRA remedies.
Why It's Relevant
Louisiana v. Callais weaponizes Shaw v. Reno's logic to argue that compliance with the Voting Rights Act itself is unconstitutional. White plaintiffs claim being placed in a majority-Black district violates their constitutional rights—turning anti-discrimination law into a tool for challenging remedies to discrimination.