The Supreme Court seemed inclined Wednesday to at least chip away at — and maybe to fully scrap — a key tenet of the Voting Rights Act.
Black voters sued, challenging the map under the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits disenfranchisement on the basis of race.
Courts agreed that the map likely violated the Voting Rights Act.
Some conservative justices have argued that the relevant part of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional because it allows for the use of race in policy decisions.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined their liberal colleagues just a few years ago to save that part of the Voting Rights Act, but seemed more skeptical today.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court appeared inclined to at least partially undermine, if not completely do away with, a fundamental principle of the Voting Rights Act.
The main idea: The conservative majority on the court questioned whether certain initiatives to give Black people and other minority groups more voting power might be unconstitutional.
With the potential to eliminate numerous Democratic-held House seats, its decision might pave the way for a fresh round of gerrymandering in red states.
Quick recap: The case began as a limited challenge to a single Louisiana congressional district, but it has since grown into a referendum on a key piece of legislation from the civil rights era.
Following the 2020 Census, the Louisiana legislature created a map that only featured one district with a majority Black population. Under the Voting Rights Act, which forbids racial disenfranchisement, black voters filed a lawsuit contesting the map.
According to the courts, the map most likely violated the Voting Rights Act. In order to create a new one, Louisiana added a second predominately Black voting district.
However, a group of voters who identified as “non-African American” filed a lawsuit, arguing that their voting rights had been diminished by the addition of the second majority-minority district.
It appears that non-African American voters will prevail.
The Voting Rights Act’s relevant section permits the use of race in policy decisions, which some conservative justices have claimed is unconstitutional.
A few years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined their liberal colleagues in defending that portion of the Voting Rights Act, but they now appeared to be less convinced.
During oral arguments, Kavanaugh stated, “This Court’s cases, in a variety of contexts, have said that race-based remedies are permissible for a period of time — sometimes for a long period of time, decades in some cases — but that they should not be indefinite and should have an end point.”.
What we’re watching: By this summer, a ruling is anticipated.
