![](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2024/05/14/gettyimages-1367049952-5--331ce8095ce5b8bd716d335e3505569f5de137c4.jpg?s=1100&c=100&f=jpeg)
US Supreme Court
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Hide caption
Caption transition
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
![](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2024/05/14/gettyimages-1367049952-5--331ce8095ce5b8bd716d335e3505569f5de137c4.jpg?s=2600&c=100&f=jpeg)
US Supreme Court
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Louisiana's new congressional redistricting plan, which for all practical purposes would provide the state with its second majority black district. However, the court's decision appears to be limited to the current 2024 election cycle.
While the court upheld the creation of Louisiana's second majority-black congressional district, the justices said a new challenge to the second district could arise. 2024 elections, but would likely disrupt what remains of the Voting Rights Act.
The 6-3 vote in this case was difficult to understand. The court's six conservative justices voted to allow the Louisiana plan to take effect in two majority-black districts, but the court's three liberals would not have weighed in. point out. Election expert Rick Hasen said progressives likely disagreed because Wednesday's case appears to have given the court an additional tool to approve or reject Congress' redistricting plan months before the election. .
![The Supreme Court has been asked to stop ruling on Louisiana's congressional maps.](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2024/04/29/ap23279591595694_sq-8ceff38d7dd2c97cd0428fae6e1551ab80b29b90.jpg?s=100&c=100&f=jpeg)
Louisiana congressional redistricting has had a painful history since the 2020 census. In 2022, a federal district court ruled that new maps drawn by state legislatures violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the black vote. In a state with six congressional seats and a 31.4% black population, only one district was majority black. The state later appealed to the Supreme Court, but the justices put the case on hold until 2022 while they consider a similar redistricting case in Alabama, in which the state used the put aside plan to violate the Voting Rights Act. .
But when the justices decided the Alabama case last June, they sided with black voters, declaring that Alabama's map violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the black vote instead of adopting a reasonable map of a majority or nearly two. Majority of black voters. At the same time, the justices reversed their previous decision to grant Louisiana's petition for reconsideration and instead sent the case back to the appeals court to either draw the new congressional lines themselves or allow the state legislature to do so.
![Supreme Court unexpectedly upholds ban on racist gerrymandering](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2023/06/08/ap23131439543141_sq-a37df50128f4fadb110c1729043af6c5c38a2ce2.jpg?s=100&c=100&f=jpeg)
Ultimately, the appeals court gave the state legislature its first apology. The Republican-controlled legislature drew new congressional district lines that included two majority-black districts, but the new maps were primarily aimed at protecting incumbents, including future House Speaker Mike Johnson and Republican Majority Leader Steve Scalise. Yes. Leader of the House of Representatives.
At that point, events took a new turn. A group of conservatives calling themselves “Non-African American Voters” challenged the Legislature's map, arguing it amounted to a racial gerrymander that violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws. Because this was a constitutional issue, not a legal challenge under the Voting Rights Act, it had to be assigned to a three-judge court. Luckily, the panel included two Trump appointees. And in a 2-1 vote, the court ruled that the state's congressional maps were unconstitutional because they relied too heavily on race.
The state immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, requesting an emergency stay to preserve the current map, which includes two majority-black districts, for this election cycle. The state's clock is ticking and the secretary of state has insisted that candidates know by Wednesday, May 15 what the congressional district lines are so they know which districts to file for in the primary.
The state argued that “this case calls for a stay in Purcell,” a reference to the so-called Purcell decision in which the justices said courts should not interfere with election rules and procedures too close to an upcoming election.
Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, said Wednesday: This case is one of the rare cases in which the Supreme Court applied the Purcell Rule to benefit Democrats. That's because Louisiana's second majority black district is likely to elect a Democrat. This means adding one seat for Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives. .
That said, nothing is certain after this election cycle, as it is almost certain that the Supreme Court will hear “non-African American” constitutional challenges in the next term.
![The Supreme Court has been asked to stop ruling on Louisiana's congressional maps.](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2024/04/29/ap23279591595694_sq-8ceff38d7dd2c97cd0428fae6e1551ab80b29b90.jpg?s=100&c=100&f=jpeg)
![Supreme Court unexpectedly upholds ban on racist gerrymandering](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2023/06/08/ap23131439543141_sq-a37df50128f4fadb110c1729043af6c5c38a2ce2.jpg?s=100&c=100&f=jpeg)
The state, eager to have its cake and eat it too, said it would likely support a “non-African American” in the next term. If the Supreme Court ultimately agrees, it would be a major blow to what remains of the once-praised Voting Rights Act.
Conclusion: The Supreme Court allowed Louisiana's new congressional maps to go into effect, but the sword of Damocles was placed over its head. In other words, it was a constitutional challenge to the Voting Rights Act.