Supreme Court Reviews Race-Based Congressional Districts

In a recent session, the Supreme Court hinted that the practice of creating congressional districts based on race might be nearing its end. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, aligning with Chief Justice John Roberts, raised questions during the oral arguments of the case Louisiana v. Calais, wondering if the time limit for such race-based measures has passed.

Kavanaugh pointed out the complexities of race-based relief, noting that while it has been deemed acceptable for varying lengths of time, it ideally shouldn’t be indefinite. “If we intentionally use race to create districts, what do you think the end point should be?” he asked, prompting some reflection.

On the other side, Janai Nelson, head of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, defended Louisiana’s second majority-black congressional district, asserting there shouldn’t be a specific deadline for such measures.

The congressional map in Louisiana has faced years of legal challenges, highlighting conflicts between the Voting Rights Act’s Section 2— which prohibits race-based voting restrictions— and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

A group of Black voters protested the inclusion of just one majority-Black district in the state’s 2022 map. Following a court order, a new map was created in January 2024, establishing a second majority-Black district. However, this led to further lawsuits from voters claiming that the new map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

The Supreme Court had considered this case last term but chose to revisit it to specifically address whether creating majority-minority congressional districts violates constitutional amendments.

Nelson cautioned that limiting Section 2 could have severe consequences, noting that in Louisiana, all Black legislators are elected from what are labeled “opportunity districts.” She emphasized how the lawsuits that led to these districts have fostered the diversity seen across the South today.

Meanwhile, the Court’s liberal justices underscored that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act addresses current discrimination, signaling that race-based remedies are still relevant. Justice Elena Kagan remarked that cases like these relate to present conditions that might dilute voters’ rights.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor added that previous discrimination could be mitigated through race-conscious policies. She pointed out that race is an integral aspect of redistricting discussions, pushing back against any notion that race is irrelevant to the matter.

Some justices also raised questions about the implications of their 2023 ruling in Allen v. Milligan, which mandated the creation of a second majority-black district in Alabama. They contemplated if the current frameworks allow for political maps to be drawn with political intent separate from racial motivations.

Justice Samuel Alito questioned whether demographic voting preferences can be categorized as votes based on race or if they merely reflect partisan divisions. A representative from the Louisiana Attorney General’s office illustrated that political affiliations often overlap with race, suggesting that the situation should not be viewed solely through a racial lens.