The Supreme Court declined on Friday to weigh in on Louisiana’s contested congressional voting map, instead ordering that new arguments be scheduled during its next term.
There was no explanation offered for why the justices did not make a decision or set a date for new arguments. All but one paragraph in the six-page order was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the lone dissent.
Justice Thomas wrote that it was the court’s duty to hear such congressional redistricting challenges and that the justices had “an obligation to resolve such challenges promptly.”
It is the latest twist in a winding legal battle over whether Louisiana drew congressional districts that fairly empower all voters after the 2020 census. The case has been closely watched, given that a decision striking down Louisiana’s map could affect the balance of power in the narrowly divided House of Representatives.
For now, the state’s latest map, which the State Legislature approved in January 2024, will remain in place. That map paved the way for a second Black Democrat, Cleo Fields, to join Representative Troy Carter, a New Orleans-area Democrat, in the state’s congressional delegation. It was the first time in decades that Louisiana had elected two Black members of Congress, and allowed Democrats to pick up a second seat in the state.
One-third of the state’s population is Black.
“Although we hoped for a decision this term, we welcome a further opportunity to present argument to the court regarding the states’ impossible task of complying with the court’s voting precedents,” Liz Murrill, the Louisiana attorney general, said in a statement shared on social media.
Observers have been counting on a decision in Louisiana to serve as a bellwether that could guide other states in determining how much the Constitution allows them to consider race as a factor in drawing districts under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The act outlaws any election practice that limits voting rights based on race. It specifies that such a violation exists when, “based on the totality of circumstances,” racial minorities have fewer opportunities than others to “to elect representatives of their choice.”
The Voting Rights Act was a central legislative achievement of the civil rights era, but the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has sharply curtailed it in recent years. In Southern states, where there is a history of local officials ignoring civil and voting rights laws until courts intervene, it has remained crucial in ensuring fair representation for Black Americans.
The justices two years ago heard a similar dispute over Alabama’s congressional map, which had been approved by the state’s Republican supermajority. In that case, Allen v. Milligan, the Supreme Court ruled that Alabama had illegally diluted the power of Black voters with its map, pointing to the Voting Rights Act.
After that decision, Alabama voters sent a second Black representative to Washington, Representative Shomari Figures, for the first time in the state’s history. Alabama, however, has continued to challenge the map, which was ultimately redrawn by an independent special master, in court.
The fight over Louisiana’s map began after the 2020 census showed that the state’s Black population had increased, prompting the Legislature to redraw congressional districts. Lawmakers adopted a map with only one district in which Black residents constituted a majority, out of six congressional districts in the state.
Black residents sued, prompting the Legislature to try again.
This time, Louisiana lawmakers approved a map that included a second district with a majority of Black voters. But in a bid to protect some of its most powerful conservative representatives, the Republican supermajority approved the creation of a district that snakes from one corner of the state to another, linking communities in the state capital of Baton Rouge, in the southeastern part of the state, with Shreveport, in the state’s northwest.
A group of Louisiana voters who identify as non-African American and are known in court filings as the “Callais plaintiffs” then filed their own suit, claiming the redrawn map amounted to a racial gerrymander.
In April 2024, a divided panel of federal judges sided with those plaintiffs and temporarily blocked the state from using the new map. The judges found that it most likely violated the Constitution because race had been the Legislature’s predominant consideration in drawing it.
Shortly after, a divided Supreme Court put that decision on hold and temporarily reinstated the congressional map that included the second majority-Black district. That map was used for congressional elections in 2024, even as the lawsuit proceeded.
Abbie VanSickle covers the United States Supreme Court for The Times. She is a lawyer and has an extensive background in investigative reporting.
Emily Cochrane is a national reporter for The Times covering the American South, based in Nashville.
The post Supreme Court Punts Decision on Louisiana Voting Map Until Next Term appeared first on New York Times.
