Supreme Court hollows out a landmark law that had protected minority voting rights for 6 decades

In a 6–3 ruling issued on April 29, 2026, the US Supreme Court decided *Louisiana v. Callais*, striking down Louisiana's second Black-majority congressional ...

What Happened

In a 6–3 ruling issued on April 29, 2026, the US Supreme Court decided Louisiana v. Callais, striking down Louisiana's second Black-majority congressional district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.
The majority opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, held that Louisiana's 2024 redistricting map — which had been drawn specifically to comply with an earlier court order under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) — was itself an impermissible race-based districting.
Beyond the map, the Court's opinion significantly reworked the 40-year-old precedent set in Thornburg v. Gingles (1986), the foundational test used to establish Section 2 VRA violations, making it materially harder for minority voters to bring successful claims.
The decision effectively dismantles the practical enforceability of Section 2 of the VRA, which for six decades prohibited voting practices that dilute minority voting power.
Louisiana's Governor suspended the May 16 primary to allow the legislature to draw a new compliant map in the wake of the ruling.
Civil rights organisations described the ruling as the most severe blow to the Voting Rights Act since Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which invalidated Section 5's preclearance formula.

Static Topic Bridges

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Section 2

The Voting Rights Act (VRA) was signed into law on August 6, 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, following the civil rights movement's campaigns against racially discriminatory voting practices — particularly in the South. Section 2 of the VRA applies nationwide and prohibits any voting standard, practice, or procedure that results in the denial or abridgement of the right to vote on account of race or colour. In 1982, Congress amended Section 2 to adopt a "results test," meaning plaintiffs need not prove discriminatory intent — only that the challenged practice results in minority voters having less opportunity to elect their preferred representatives.

Enacted: August 6, 1965
Section 2: Nationwide prohibition on discriminatory voting practices; covers both intentional discrimination and practices with discriminatory results (after 1982 amendment)
Section 5 (preclearance): Required certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing voting laws — this section was rendered effectively inoperative by Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
The VRA was extended multiple times: 1970, 1975, 1982, 2006

Connection to this news: The Louisiana v. Callais ruling reworks the Section 2 framework established under the 1982 amendment and the Gingles precedent, reducing the law's practical power to protect minority voting rights even where discriminatory effects are demonstrated.

The Gingles Test and Majority-Minority Districts

In Thornburg v. Gingles (1986), the Supreme Court established a three-part framework for Section 2 claims based on vote dilution. Plaintiffs must show: (1) the minority group is sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district; (2) the minority is politically cohesive; and (3) the white majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to usually defeat the minority's preferred candidates. Courts have used this test for four decades to evaluate whether redistricting maps dilute minority voting power. The Louisiana v. Callais ruling reworks each of these prongs, raising the bar significantly.

Thornburg v. Gingles: 1986 Supreme Court decision establishing the Section 2 vote dilution test
Majority-minority districts: Congressional or state legislative districts where a racial/ethnic minority group forms the majority of the population or voting-age population, created to enable minority communities to elect their preferred representatives
Louisiana's case arose from the state's failure (in the 2022 map) to draw a second majority-Black district, despite Black residents comprising approximately 33% of the state's population
Louisiana's 2024 map (drawn in compliance with Allen v. Milligan, 2023) created a second majority-Black district, which was then challenged and struck down by the current ruling

Connection to this news: By reworking the Gingles framework, the Court makes it substantially harder for minority voters nationwide to challenge redistricting maps that dilute their electoral power.

Racial Gerrymandering and the Constitution

The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and the Fifteenth Amendment (prohibiting denial of the right to vote based on race) both constrain how race may be used in drawing electoral districts. The Supreme Court has held in prior cases (Shaw v. Reno, 1993; Miller v. Johnson, 1995) that when race is the predominant factor in drawing a district, it is subject to strict scrutiny — meaning the state must show a compelling governmental interest and narrow tailoring. Complying with the VRA has generally been accepted as a compelling interest, but the Louisiana v. Callais ruling narrows the scope of that justification.

Fourteenth Amendment (1868): Equal protection of the laws; basis for anti-gerrymandering challenges
Fifteenth Amendment (1870): Right to vote shall not be denied on account of race
Strict scrutiny standard: Applied when race is the predominant factor in district design; state must show compelling interest and narrow tailoring
Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Struck down Section 4(b) of VRA, rendering Section 5 preclearance inoperative — the first major dismantling of the VRA

Connection to this news: The Louisiana v. Callais ruling represents the second major structural limitation of the VRA — the first being Shelby County (2013) which gutted preclearance, and now this ruling narrowing Section 2's reach.

Key Facts & Data

Case: Louisiana v. Callais, decided April 29, 2026
Decision: 6–3 (along ideological lines), majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito
Voting Rights Act enacted: August 6, 1965; protected minority voting rights for six decades
Section 2 (1982 amendment): Adopted "results test" — no need to prove discriminatory intent
Thornburg v. Gingles (1986): Foundational 40-year-old precedent that this ruling significantly reworks
Prior landmark: Shelby County v. Holder (2013) — invalidated Section 5 preclearance mechanism
Prior related case: Allen v. Milligan (2023) — SC ordered Louisiana to draw second majority-Black district
Louisiana's Black population: approximately 33% of the state
Immediate consequence: Louisiana Governor suspended May 16 primary to allow legislature to redraw maps
The ruling applies not just to congressional maps but also to state legislative and local electoral districts