Supreme Court to rehear major Louisiana redistricting case
The court was expected to release the decision on Friday along with its other final opinions of the term.
'These cases are restored to the calendar for reargument. In due course, the Court will issue an order scheduling argument and specifying any additional questions to be addressed in supplemental briefing,' the court's unsigned order reads.
The majority did not explain their reasoning or the focus of the new arguments. Louisiana's map will remain in effect until the ultimate decision.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying he would've decided the case now. Thomas raised concerns the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Voting Rights Act breaches the Constitution.
'That decision should be straightforward. Nevertheless, the Court demurs,' Thomas wrote.
The decision is unusual and adds to a longstanding saga over whether the state should have a second majority-Black district. The high court indicated it would revisit the state's congressional map after a group of 'non-African American voters' challenged the map, arguing it constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander given the state's lengths to comply with the Voting Rights Act too far.
Friday's outcome leaves unresolved the long-running redistricting battle, which now has turned to states' 'breathing room' to comply with the Voting Rights Act before their efforts violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection guarantee.
The battle began after the 2020 census, when the Republican-controlled legislature overrode then-Gov. John Bel Edwards's (D) veto of a congressional map that included only one majority-Black district.
Black voters and civil rights organizations sued under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, claiming the design diluted the power of Black voters.
A three-judge panel agreed. The Supreme Court temporarily revived the map for the 2022 midterms, only to later toss Louisiana's appeal upon deciding another redistricting case in Alabama.
Republican leaders in Louisiana grew concerned that a court would soon step in to draw the boundaries if they didn't act. So begrudgingly, they stopped litigating and passed a new map that added a second majority-Black district.
Like the first, the new map came under a legal challenge. This time, a group of self-described 'non-African American' voters claimed the legislature unconstitutionally sorted Black voters into the new district in violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection guarantee.
The case returned to the Supreme Court after a three-judge panel agreed with the voters and invalidated the new design. The high court allowed it to go into effect for last year's elections as they considered the case.
Louisiana argues it was within its 'breathing room' to fix the earlier Voting Rights Act violation. The state also contended race didn't predominate because the new district's snakelike shape was an effort to protect high-profile incumbents, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La) and Rep. Julia Letlow (R-La.), who sits on the powerful House Appropriations Committee.
But above all else, Louisiana in its appeal pleaded to the justices for guidance on how it can draw a legally sound map.
Updated: 11:41 a.m. ET
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Father of Stephen Lawrence ‘very frustrated' at killer's parole hearing delay
The father of Stephen Lawrence is 'very frustrated' and has asked for a full explanation after the public parole hearing for one of his son's killers was delayed. David Norris was due to make a bid for freedom on Wednesday and Thursday, but the hearing was adjourned because unspecified information was not made available to the panel that is due to hear the case. A lawyer for Stephen's father Neville Lawrence said the Government had failed to provide the details. Guy Mitchell, from Hodge Jones and Allen, said: 'Dr Lawrence is understandably very frustrated by this last-minute delay to the hearing which was due to go ahead on Wednesday. 'We understand this is due to the Government failing to provide certain information to the Parole Board in time. Dr Lawrence is seeking a full explanation as to the reason for this failing.' Norris was jailed for life with a minimum term of 14 years and three months in 2012 after he and Gary Dobson were convicted of murder in 2011 nearly 20 years after Stephen's racist killing. A spokesperson for the Parole Board said: 'The hearing has had to be adjourned due to information directed by the panel not being made available for the case. 'Without all proper information, the panel cannot consider a parole review. 'The panel's priority must be to ensure the relevant information is available, so that they can thoroughly review the potential risks and ensure public protection.' A new date will be set for the public hearing once the information has been provided. Stephen was on his way to catch a bus with his friend Duwayne Brooks in Eltham, south-east London, in April 1993 when he was set upon and killed by a gang of five or six attackers who used a racist term before they struck. Incompetence and allegations of corruption, centred around Norris's drug dealer father Clifford Norris, dogged the investigation into Stephen's death for years. There was also outrage when it emerged that undercover officers from the Metropolitan Police had spied on justice campaigners supporting the family. In 1999 a public inquiry into the case found that the force was institutionally racist, a conclusion repeated by Baroness Casey in 2023 in her review following the rape and murder of Sarah Everard by a serving officer. Parole hearings are normally held in private but a public hearing was allowed in Norris's case after an application by the media that was backed by Stephen's parents. In a document outlining the decision, it was revealed that Norris now accepts that he was present at the scene of the murder, but claims that he punched Stephen and was not the person who stabbed him. The other suspects in the case were Jamie and Neil Acourt, who have since been convicted of unrelated drugs offences, and Luke Knight. A sixth suspect, Matthew White, died in 2021. The College of Policing is leading a review of the most recent stage of the investigation into Stephen's death after Dobson and Norris were convicted.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Darren Walker's new book is still hopeful despite growing inequality as he leaves Ford Foundation
NEW YORK (AP) — Darren Walker needed to be convinced of his new book's relevance. The outgoing Ford Foundation president feared that 'The Idea of America,' set to publish in September just before he leaves the nonprofit, risked feeling disjointed. In more than eight dozen selected texts dating back to 2013, he reflects on everything from his path as a Black, gay child from rural Texas into the halls of premiere American philanthropies to his solutions for reversing the deepening inequality of our 'new Gilded Age.' 'To be clear, not everything I said and wrote over the last 12 years is worthy of publication,' Walker said. A point of great regret, he said, is that he finds American democracy weaker now than when he started. Younger generations lack access to the same 'mobility escalator' that he rode from poverty. And he described President Donald Trump's administration's first six months as 'disorienting' for a sector he successfully pushed to adopt more ambitious and just funding practices. Despite that bleak picture, Walker embraces the characterization of his upcoming collection as patriotic. 'My own journey in America leaves me no option but to be hopeful because I have lived in a country that believed in me,' he said. Walker recently discussed his tenure and the book's call for shared values with the Associated Press inside his Ford Foundation office — where an enlarged picture of a Black child taken by Malian portrait photographer Seydou Keïta still hangs, one of many underrepresented artists' works that populated the headquarters under his leadership. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Q: Upon becoming Ford Foundation's president, you suggested that 'our most important job is to work ourselves out of a job' — a 2013 statement you include in the book. How would you grade your efforts? A: The past 12 years have been both exhilarating and exhausting. Exhilarating because there's never been a more exciting time to be in philanthropy. And exhausting because the political, socioeconomic dynamics of the last 12 years are very worrisome for our future. Philanthropy can play a role in helping to strengthen our democracy. But philanthropy can't save America. I would probably give myself a B or a B-. I don't think where we are as a nation after 12 years is where any country would want to be that had its eye on the future and the strength of our democracy. Q: Is there anything you would do differently? A: In 2013 and those early speeches, I identified growing inequality as a challenge to the strength of our democracy. And a part of that manifestation of growing inequality was a growing sense of disaffection — from our politics, our institutions, our economy. For the first time, a decade or so ago, we had clear evidence that working class white households were increasingly downwardly mobile economically. And the implications for that are deep and profound for our politics and our democracy. We started a program on increasing our investments in rural America, acknowledging some of the challenges, for example, of the trends around the impacts of the opioid epidemic on those communities. I underestimated the depth and the collective sense of being left behind. Even though I think I was correct in diagnosing the problem, I think the strategy to respond was not focused enough on this population. Q: Many people credit you for using Ford Foundation's endowment to increase grantmaking during the pandemic. Is that sort of creativity needed now with the new strains faced by the philanthropic sector? A: One of the disappointments I have with philanthropy is that we don't take enough risk. We don't innovate given the potential to use our capital to provide solutions. I do think that, in the coming years, foundations are going to be challenged to step up and lean in in ways that we haven't since the pandemic. The 5% payout is treated as a ceiling by a lot of foundations and, in fact, it's a floor. During these times when there's so much accumulated wealth sitting in our endowments, the public rightly is asking questions about just how much of that we are using and towards what end. Q: Where do you derive this sense of 'radical hope' at the end of your book? A: As a poor kid in rural Texas, I was given the license to dream. In fact, I was encouraged to dream and to believe that it will be possible for me to overcome the circumstances into which I was born. I've lived on both sides of the line of inequality. And I feel incredibly fortunate. But I'm also sobered by the gap between the privileged and the poor and the working-class people in America. It has widened during my lifetime and that is something I worry a lot about. But I'm hopeful because I think about my ancestors who were Black, enslaved, poor. African Americans, Black people, Black Americans have been hopeful for 400 years and have been patriots in believing in the possibility that this country would realize its aspirations for equality and justice. That has been our North Star. Q: Heather Gerken, the dean of Yale's law school, was recently named as your successor. Why is it important to have a leader with a legal background and an expertise in democracy? A: She is the perfect leader for Ford because she understands that at the center of our work must be a belief in democracy and democratic institutions and processes. She is also a bridge builder. She is a coalition builder. She's bold and courageous. I'm just thrilled about her taking the helm of the Ford Foundation. It is a signal from the Ford Foundation Board of Trustees that we are going to double down on our investment and our commitment to strengthening, protecting and promoting democracy. Q: Youtold AP last year that, when you exited this building for the last time, you'd only be looking forward. What does 'forward' mean to you now? A: I have resolved that I don't want to be a president or a CEO. I don't need to be a president of CEO. I think leaders can become nostalgic and hold onto their own history. Now there's no doubt, I know, that my obituary is going to say, 'Darren Walker, the president of the Ford Foundation.' That's the most important job I'll ever have. But hopefully I'll be able to add some more important work to that. ___
San Francisco Chronicle
8 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Darren Walker's new book is still hopeful despite growing inequality as he leaves Ford Foundation
NEW YORK (AP) — Darren Walker needed to be convinced of his new book's relevance. The outgoing Ford Foundation president feared that 'The Idea of America," set to publish in September just before he leaves the nonprofit, risked feeling disjointed. In more than eight dozen selected texts dating back to 2013, he reflects on everything from his path as a Black, gay child from rural Texas into the halls of premiere American philanthropies to his solutions for reversing the deepening inequality of our 'new Gilded Age." 'To be clear, not everything I said and wrote over the last 12 years is worthy of publication," Walker said. A point of great regret, he said, is that he finds American democracy weaker now than when he started. Younger generations lack access to the same 'mobility escalator' that he rode from poverty. And he described President Donald Trump's administration's first six months as 'disorienting' for a sector he successfully pushed to adopt more ambitious and just funding practices. Despite that bleak picture, Walker embraces the characterization of his upcoming collection as patriotic. 'My own journey in America leaves me no option but to be hopeful because I have lived in a country that believed in me,' he said. Walker recently discussed his tenure and the book's call for shared values with the Associated Press inside his Ford Foundation office — where an enlarged picture of a Black child taken by Malian portrait photographer Seydou Keïta still hangs, one of many underrepresented artists' works that populated the headquarters under his leadership. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Q: Upon becoming Ford Foundation's president, you suggested that 'our most important job is to work ourselves out of a job' — a 2013 statement you include in the book. How would you grade your efforts? A: The past 12 years have been both exhilarating and exhausting. Exhilarating because there's never been a more exciting time to be in philanthropy. And exhausting because the political, socioeconomic dynamics of the last 12 years are very worrisome for our future. Philanthropy can play a role in helping to strengthen our democracy. But philanthropy can't save America. I would probably give myself a B or a B-. I don't think where we are as a nation after 12 years is where any country would want to be that had its eye on the future and the strength of our democracy. Q: Is there anything you would do differently? A: In 2013 and those early speeches, I identified growing inequality as a challenge to the strength of our democracy. And a part of that manifestation of growing inequality was a growing sense of disaffection — from our politics, our institutions, our economy. For the first time, a decade or so ago, we had clear evidence that working class white households were increasingly downwardly mobile economically. And the implications for that are deep and profound for our politics and our democracy. We started a program on increasing our investments in rural America, acknowledging some of the challenges, for example, of the trends around the impacts of the opioid epidemic on those communities. I underestimated the depth and the collective sense of being left behind. Even though I think I was correct in diagnosing the problem, I think the strategy to respond was not focused enough on this population. Q: Many people credit you for using Ford Foundation's endowment to increase grantmaking during the pandemic. Is that sort of creativity needed now with the new strains faced by the philanthropic sector? A: One of the disappointments I have with philanthropy is that we don't take enough risk. We don't innovate given the potential to use our capital to provide solutions. I do think that, in the coming years, foundations are going to be challenged to step up and lean in in ways that we haven't since the pandemic. The 5% payout is treated as a ceiling by a lot of foundations and, in fact, it's a floor. During these times when there's so much accumulated wealth sitting in our endowments, the public rightly is asking questions about just how much of that we are using and towards what end. Q: Where do you derive this sense of 'radical hope' at the end of your book? A: As a poor kid in rural Texas, I was given the license to dream. In fact, I was encouraged to dream and to believe that it will be possible for me to overcome the circumstances into which I was born. I've lived on both sides of the line of inequality. And I feel incredibly fortunate. But I'm also sobered by the gap between the privileged and the poor and the working-class people in America. It has widened during my lifetime and that is something I worry a lot about. But I'm hopeful because I think about my ancestors who were Black, enslaved, poor. African Americans, Black people, Black Americans have been hopeful for 400 years and have been patriots in believing in the possibility that this country would realize its aspirations for equality and justice. That has been our North Star. Q: Heather Gerken, the dean of Yale's law school, was recently named as your successor. Why is it important to have a leader with a legal background and an expertise in democracy? A: She is the perfect leader for Ford because she understands that at the center of our work must be a belief in democracy and democratic institutions and processes. She is also a bridge builder. She is a coalition builder. She's bold and courageous. I'm just thrilled about her taking the helm of the Ford Foundation. It is a signal from the Ford Foundation Board of Trustees that we are going to double down on our investment and our commitment to strengthening, protecting and promoting democracy. Q: Youtold AP last year that, when you exited this building for the last time, you'd only be looking forward. What does 'forward' mean to you now? A: I have resolved that I don't want to be a president or a CEO. I don't need to be a president of CEO. I think leaders can become nostalgic and hold onto their own history. Now there's no doubt, I know, that my obituary is going to say, 'Darren Walker, the president of the Ford Foundation." That's the most important job I'll ever have. But hopefully I'll be able to add some more important work to that.
