Louisiana last year sent two Black representatives to Congress for the first time in almost three decades under a congressional map which is now being challenged as unfair to the state’s non-Black residents.
The Supreme Court is set to hear a case on Monday that will test how states can consider race when drawing congressional districts. There is a chance that the ruling could also influence which party has an advantage in the disputed district during the 2026 midterm elections. That will determine control of the closely divided House.
The lawsuit, has been brought by non-Black voters. It questions how states balance protecting minority voting power under civil rights laws while also avoiding discrimination against other voters. Civil rights groups worry that the court’s decision could weaken protections for minority voters.
On March 24, the U.S. Supreme Court will review Louisiana’s congressional map after a lower court found that the redistricting plan was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
The case will weigh the Voting Rights Act against concerns of racial gerrymandering. pic.twitter.com/VRrCZJq7bY
— The Redistrict Network (@RedistrictNet) March 17, 2025
Louisiana’s lawyers argue the Supreme Court needs to clarify the “breathing room” states have when balancing these requirements. They say states like Louisiana face constant legal challenges; also accused of having too few majority-Black districts, then sued again for adding one.
“This hamster wheel will not stop spinning,” the state’s lawyers said.
First Map Challenged for Diluting Black Vote
The case began when Louisiana redrew its six congressional districts after the 2020 Census. Black residents make up about one-third of the state’s population. Yet, the map initially included only one majority-Black district.
Civil rights advocates challenged the map. They stated it violated the Voting Rights Act as it dilutes Black voting power. A federal court in Baton Rouge and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both found it likely that Louisiana could reasonably form a second majority-Black district.
However, after the Republican-led legislature came up with a map with two majority-Black districts, including one that crosses the state diagonally, a divided panel of federal judges took side with non-Black voters. The challengers argued that the map was unconstitutional because race played the dominant factor in its design.
The state then asked the Supreme Court to intervene.
The court allowed the map to stay in place for the 2024 election but later agreed to hear the underlying dispute.
Political Consequences and Legal Arguments
The newly created district elected Democrat Cleo Fields to Congress. According to the challengers, the map’s focus on race resulted in a “racial quota” and that costed Republicans a seat in a Congress which was already narrowly divided.
“Why, in the 2020s, would Louisiana racially balkanize new areas of a State where Black population is flatlining, integration is succeeding, and the record lacks evidence of voting harms to Black voters?” the challengers’ lawyers wrote.
JUST IN: The Supreme Court says Louisiana’s congressional map must be redrawn to add a second majority-Black district. https://t.co/IJkzNEt78w
— CNN (@CNN) June 26, 2023
They also took reference of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s past statement and suggested that Congress’ authority to approve “race-based redistricting” may not extend indefinitely. Kavanaugh’s comment was part of a 2023 decision when the court’s conservative majority rejected the idea of completely “color-blind” districts in Alabama.
Louisiana’s Defense
Louisiana states that race was not the main factor in drawing the map. State lawyers argue that the map considered other goals, such as protecting House Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise and keeping communities of shared interests along the Red River connected.
They claim the map adheres to the legal standard set by the court’s 2023 decision, which reaffirmed that race cannot predominate in redistricting. If the map fails this test, Louisiana’s attorneys say the court should provide clearer guidance.
Civil Rights Concerns
Civil rights groups fear the case could weaken protections under the Voting Rights Act. Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, expressed their concerns that the court might use this case to undermine protections against vote dilution, even though those protections were upheld two years ago.
Jenkins noted that voters in Mississippi, Georgia, and Texas are also seeking enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court has ruled that Alabama must redraw its congressional maps which discriminate against black voters. pic.twitter.com/yd53vfcrCD
— Walz’s Wins 🌴🥥 (@WalzsWins) June 8, 2023
“The idea that you have to be completely blind to race is simply not the way that the court for decades has approached this area of law,” Jenkins said. “That would be a head-spinning reversal of its own precedent and decades of constitutional law on this question.”
Louis Fuentes-Rohwer, a civil rights law expert at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law, suggested the court may hold off on gutting the Voting Rights Act this year. However, he very much believes the trend is clear.
Since the court struck down a major part of the Voting Rights Act in 2013, Fuentes-Rohwer said, “the question has been not if, but when.”
A decision is expected by the end of June.
