JUST IN: SCOTUS To Hear Case On Race-Based Congressional Districts

The U.S. Supreme Court indicated Friday that it will consider outlawing the use of race in drawing congressional maps, setting the stage for a potentially landmark decision that has the ability to fundamentally reshape the nation’s legislative maps and have a significant impact on congressional elections going forward.

Expanding upon a Louisiana-based case that is already on the docket, justices said they will consider arguments that the 1965 Voting Rights Act no longer provides a legitimate basis for map creators to intentionally craft majority Black or majority Hispanic districts. The ruling could also impact state and local legislative maps.

As of the 2022 midterm elections, the U.S. House had 11 majority Black and 31 majority Hispanic districts. Ahead of the 2024 election cycle, the high court issued a ruling on the issue in Allen v. Milligan, a case brought after the Republican-controlled legislature drew a congressional map that left just one majority black district in the state.

Civil rights groups, including the Alabama State Conference of the NAACP, challenged the map, arguing it violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA)  by diluting Black voting power through “packing” Black voters into one district and “cracking” others across multiple districts.

In a 5-4 ruling, the Court upheld a lower court’s decision that found Alabama’s map had likely violated the VRA. The ruling required Alabama to draw a second majority black district, resulting in a Democrat pickup in 2024.

The case also had an effect on a similar case in Louisiana, prompting the state to draw a second majority black district as well, which had the same effect as it did in Alabama.

On March 24, 2025, the Court heard arguments in Louisiana v. Callais. The case questions whether creating a second majority-Black district to comply with the VRA violates the 14th or 15th Amendments by prioritizing race.Conservative justices, including Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh, both go whom supported the Milligan ruling, expressed skepticism about the new map’s less compact district shapes, suggesting a potential shift.

On Friday, August 1, the court signaled another potential shift by ordering additional briefing on the constitutionality of intentionally drawing districts on the basis of race, signaling a broader review that could weaken Section 2 protections. Additional arguments in the case are expected to be heard this upcoming fall.

A decision limiting the ability to create majority-minority districts to comply with the VRA could weaken Section 2 protections nationwide, affecting redistricting in a number of states. The conservative Supreme Court majority has historically been skeptical of race-based policies, and Justice Clarence Thomas has openly questioned the constitutionality of Section 2 in redistricting.

Depending on scope, a definitive ruling could also have a massive effect on redistricting efforts in states like Texas and Ohio, where mid-decade redistricting is already underway. Scaling back VRA power could allow Republican-controlled states to further dilute Democrat-held districts, though it could also run the risk of spreading out Democrat voters and in effect, making “safe” seats under current maps more competitive.

A final ruling is expected in June 2026, which would give states enough time to redraw maps ahead of November’s midterm elections.