The U.S. Supreme Court on April 29 struck down a voting map in Louisiana, creating a path for other states to redraw congressional maps that could affect elections for years.
The result of the Louisiana V. Callais decision may be disastrous for racial minority political power in the United States, says an expert on voting rights law at Washington University in St. Louis.
“The big-ticket takeaways are clear: the court has gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, effectively overruled its recent decision in Allen V. Milligan, and opened the door to the dismantling of majority-minority districts across the country, particularly in the South,” wrote Travis Crum, a professor at WashU Law, in a piece shared on the Election Law Blog.
“In ordinary times, Callais’s impact would not be felt until the next redistricting cycle,” he wrote. “But these are not ordinary times, and the country is in the midst of a mid-decade redistricting war that will accelerate its impact.”
The court didn’t strike down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, but significantly weakened it by allowing states to justify maps on partisan grounds, Crum wrote. This shifts the law closer to requiring proof of discriminatory intent rather than effects, while also signaling broader changes in how race and strict scrutiny may be treated under the 15th Amendment, he wrote.
The decision fits into a trend of narrowing voting rights protections and elevating intent-based claims, he wrote.
“Given how much Callais changed the law and moved Section 2 far closer to an intent standard, the court might be tempted to take the case to explain how intent claims work in a post-Callais world. The court might not be done with Section 2 this redistricting cycle.”
Read more on the Election Law Blog.
