High Court defers Louisiana's debated congressional districting plan until the autumn
Unfiltered Remix:
The Supreme Court's big dance with Louisiana's controversial congressional map took a weird turn on Friday. Instead of ruling, they decided to keep the case on ice until later this year. So, for now, the funky district that birthed an extra Black and Democratic representative in Louisiana's otherwise red delegation stays in play.
Naturally, Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's resident maverick, disagreed with the postponement. He wanted to dive right in and rule on this mess. He even hinted that he'd give the Voting Rights Act the boot.
Here's the skinny: Louisiana was in a pickle. First, a federal court said they'd probably violated the Voting Rights Act by creating only one predominantly Black district out of six. When they tried to rectify the situation by making it two, a group of obnoxious white voters cried foul, claiming the Constitution was violated due to excessive consideration of skin color.
Thomas was all worked up about rushing to hear the case. He'd rather settle it now, asserting that the court had a duty to promptly address challenges to congressional redistricting.
The Voting Rights Act requires states not to screw minority voters during the once-a-decade redistricting process. This means no packing them into one district or cracking up colorful neighborhoods to weaken their influence. The law was designed to combat post-Civil War efforts—especially in the South—to suppress Black political power.
But the 14th Amendment insists that states shouldn't base their maps primarily on race. If they do, they've got to prove they had a solid reason and only used race in a narrow, non-discriminatory way.
Given the tension between the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court usually gives states some leeway in drawing their maps. The central question in this case was just how much room state lawmakers should have for maneuver.
The high court's conservative majority has been a vocal critic of policies they think favor one race over another. They famously ended affirmative action in college admissions in 2023. The Trump administration used this decision to discourage diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives across government and private sectors.
The Supreme Court has also eroded the Voting Rights Act's power over the years, such as scrapping the requirement for states with a racist past to clear changes with the Justice Department in 2013. But a surprising turn came in 2024, when the court bolstered a key VRA provision by ordering Alabama to create an additional Black-majority district. Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, penned the decision for a 5-4 majority, aligning with the court's three liberals. Even another conservative, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, agreed with the major parts of the ruling.
Part of the debate in this case is whether race dominated the redistricting process. The plaintiffs claimed the state was obsessed with skin color when redrawing the map. Officials said they followed the first court's order about adding a second Black district while mainly focusing on politics—specifically, keeping incumbents like House Speaker Mike Johnson intact.
The whacky district Louisiana came up with snakes its way through Louisiana for over 250 miles. It aims to create a district where a majority of voters are Black, going from 24% to 54%. It was argued that Rep. Cleo Fields—a Democrat—won the seat last year by taking advantage of this district.
The Biden administration backed the lower court's ruling, while the Trump administration switched sides on the issue after leaving office. They claimed they'd reconsidered and no longer supported their earlier stance.
Politics surrounding the districting map of Louisiana, which was accused of violating the Voting Rights Act, took an unexpected turn with the Supreme Court's decision to postpone ruling on the case. This decision appeared divisive, as Justice Clarence Thomas expressed his reservation, favoring immediate policy-and-legislation action to address the alleged violations. Meanwhile, the general-news landscape remains attentive to war-and-conflicts and political matters in Louisiana, particularly the ongoing debate about the role of race and politics in the redrawing of the district map.
