The US Supreme Court on Wednesday (local time) limited how the Voting Rights Act can be used to create majority black or Hispanic constituencies. The decision is seen as a boost to Republican efforts to retain control of the House of Representatives in this year’s midterms and beyond, NBC reported.
In a 6-3 decision, supporters say, the Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana’s 2024 electoral map, which created the second predominantly black congressional district, was an “unconstitutional racial gerrymander.”
Although the court left Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act intact, Wednesday’s ruling effectively weakens the landmark law that emerged from the Civil Rights Movement and protects the collective right of racial minorities to vote during redistricting.
NBC said it was unclear how the decision would affect the midterm elections, which are due to be held in November. Primary elections are going well in most states.
The Voting Rights Act has been weakened since 2013
Once considered the crown jewel of the civil rights movement, the Voting Rights Act has been largely weakened by an increasingly conservative US Supreme Court since 2013. A major exception came nearly two years ago, when the court upheld a provision designed to ensure that minority voters were not excluded from the process of drawing new congressional district lines.
What is the case related to?
The case centers on a redistricting map drawn by the Louisiana Legislature after the decennial census. After years of litigation, the state, where roughly 30 percent of the population is black, initially resisted but eventually agreed to create a second majority-black district. Two of the six members of the House of Representatives are African American.
Normally, that would be the end of the case; however, a self-described group of “non-African American voters” intervened after new maps were drawn to challenge legislative redistricting.
US President Donald Trump’s administration backed the call, arguing that black voters should not be given a second majority district. On April 24, the court agreed. “Properly understood, Section 2 does not impose unconstitutional liability and should not have imposed liability on Louisiana for its 2022 map,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. “Thus, compliance with section 2 could not justify the state’s use of race-based redistribution.”
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote, “I dissent because the Court is betraying its duty to faithfully apply the great law that Congress wrote. I dissent because the Court’s decision will set aside Congress’s fundamental right to racial equality in electoral opportunity.”
According to Bloomberg, Wednesday’s ruling is likely to help Republicans, given that contested districts such as Louisiana’s tend to vote Democratic. Progressive groups said as many as 19 congressional districts with predominantly black or Hispanic populations were at risk, along with many more state and local districts. A similar challenge to a majority-black district in Alabama is already before the Supreme Court, and the justices are likely to rule on the case in the coming days.
The US Supreme Court’s verdict comes weeks before Louisiana’s May 16 primary election.
