Supreme Court punts Louisiana's long-contested congressional map to the fall
The Supreme Court punted on Friday in a major legal challenge to Louisiana's long-litigated congressional map, taking the unusual step of holding the case over for a second term.
The decision means the sprawling district that added a second Black and Democratic lawmaker to the state's overwhelmingly Republican delegation will remain in place, at least for the time being. The court said it will hear another set of arguments about the questions raised in the case in the term that begins this fall.
Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative, dissented from the decision to hold the appeal over until next term.
Louisiana filed the appeal, arguing that it was caught in an impossible position: At first, a federal court ruled that the state had likely violated the Voting Rights Act by drawing only one majority Black district out of six.
When the state sought to comply with that decision by drawing a second majority Black district, a group of self-described 'non-Black voters' sued, alleging the state violated the Constitution by relying too much on race to meet the first court's demands.
'Congress requires this court to exercise jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to congressional redistricting, and we accordingly have an obligation to resolve such challenges promptly,' Thomas wrote in his dissent.
Thomas wrote that he would have held that the provision of the Voting Rights Act at issue in the case is unconstitutional.
The Voting Rights Act requires that states not dilute the power of minority voters during the once-a-decade redistricting process, such as by 'packing' those voters into one district or 'cracking' neighborhoods of color up into many districts to spread out their influence. The law was enacted in response to decades of post-Civil War efforts – particularly in the South – to limit the political power of African Americans.
And yet the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause demands that a state not draw a map predominantly based on race. If it does, it must demonstrate that it had a compelling reason to do so and carried out the effort in the narrowest way possible.
Because of that inherent tension between the Voting Rights Act and the equal protection clause, the Supreme Court has tended to give states some 'breathing room' in drawing their maps. One of the central questions in the case, Louisiana v. Callais, was exactly how much room state lawmakers should have.
The high court's conservative majority has grown increasingly skeptical of policies of any kind that, in the court's words, pick 'winners and losers' based on race. In the most notable example, a six-justice majority ended affirmative action in college admissions in 2023 – a decision the Trump administration has used to justify attempts to curb diversity, equity and inclusion programs in both the government and private sector.
The Supreme Court has also in recent years chipped away at the power of the Voting Rights Act, including with a 2013 decision that ended the practice of requiring states with a history of racist policies to preclear changes to their voting rights laws with the Justice Department.
But in a surprise decision a decade later, the high court went in the other direction, bolstering a key provision of the law by ordering Alabama to redraw its map to allow for an additional Black-majority district. Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, penned the opinion for a 5-4 majority, siding with the court's three liberals. Another conservative, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, agreed with the key parts of the decision.
Part of what was at issue in the Louisiana case is whether race 'predominated' the redistricting process. The plaintiffs said Louisiana lawmakers were entirely focused on race in the redrawing. State officials have said that, while they were responding to the first court's order about a second Black district, they also were focused mainly on politics – specifically a desire to draw the boundaries in a way that would retain incumbents, including House Speaker Mike Johnson.
The Louisiana district the state drew slashes diagonally for some 250 miles from Shreveport in the northwest of the state to Baton Rouge in the southeast to create a district where Black residents make up some 54% of voters – up from about 24% under the old lines. During oral arguments in March, Roberts described it as a 'snake that runs from one end of the state to the other.'
Rep. Cleo Fields, a Democrat, won the seat in last year's election – adding a second Democrat to the state's delegation.
The Biden administration submitted a brief to the Supreme Court that technically supported neither party but urged the justices to reverse a special three-judge district court that would throw out the current map. Days after taking office, the Trump administration submitted a letter declaring that it had 'reconsidered the government's position' and that the earlier brief 'no longer represents the position of the United States.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
36 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US Envoy Sees F-35 Issue With Turkey Resolved Soon, Anadolu Says
The US ambassador to Turkey said a resolution to a long-running F-35 dispute between the NATO allies is possible by the end of the year, signaling a potential breakthrough in a yearslong standoff that has strained defense ties. Ambassador Tom Barrack said both sides are now seeking a 'fresh start' and that Congress is willing to revisit the issue. 'I believe we have the opportunity to have a solution by the end of the year,' Barrack said in remarks to Turkish state-run Anadolu Agency.


Washington Post
38 minutes ago
- Washington Post
How Trump's emergencies and wins dominated the Supreme Court term
The Supreme Court term that ended Friday was consumed by an unprecedented crush of emergency asks from President Donald Trump that forced the justices to confront high-stakes questions about whether to quickly green-light some of his most controversial plans. For a second year, Trump dominated the docket, culminating with the conservative majority handing the president a major win by making it more difficult for lower-court judges to halt his policies nationwide, including the president's ban on birthright citizenship.

Boston Globe
40 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. lawmakers say they are on precipice of outlawing mandatory tenant-paid broker's fees in $61 billion budget
State Senator Michael Rodrigues, the lead negotiator for his chamber, said the agreement came after warnings from the state budget office and budget watchdogs 'that tax revenues are precarious, to say the least.' 'We wanted to . . . minimize anything that happens, especially down in DC,' the Westport Democrat said. 'We still don't know what's going to happen down there.' Advertisement The $61 billion plan, which needs final legislative approval before going to Governor Maura Healey, would come in $1 billion under what Legislative leaders said they cut $300 million in what they had originally planned to spend on MassHealth, the state's Medicaid program, and stripped out administrative costs. They also said they slimmed down some local earmarks, or funding for projects in individual districts. Advertisement In doing so, they also rewrote its plan so that $450 million in money they plan to dedicate to local school districts will now be funded by money generated by the so-called millionaires tax. The agreement would now commit to spending $2.4 billion from that pot of revenue, a nearly $500 million jump from what they initially agreed to and more than $1 billion above what they budgeted for this fiscal year. The money generated by the surtax has repeatedly blown past state projections, with nearly State Representative Aaron Michlewitz, the House's budget chair, said legislative leaders felt they could 'be a little more aggressive with our approach' in using surtax funding given how much it's raised. 'Taking the term from Washington, this was actually the real Earlier this month, Healey signed a Rodrigues pointed to the bill as a sign that the Legislature is investing in the T, which would get $470 million in what lawmakers called 'direct investment.' 'We are very comfortable and confident that the amount of money that we invested in the MBTA will allow them to continue on the path they've been on in improving,' he said. Advertisement The sweeping plan announced Sunday also includes several major policy changes. It would effectively ban charging tenants mandatory broker's fees — The measure that would outlaw mandatory tenant-paid broker's fees is years in the making. The charges typically amount to a month's rent and have become a virtual rarity elsewhere. After Healey already The budget also would mandate that regional transit authorities provide fare-free service, while giving them $209 million in funding to make it a reality. The compromise budget also left out pieces of policy proposed by both chambers. The Senate, for example, attached a rider to its budget plan that would give local officials, not lawmakers on Beacon Hill, the power to determine the number of liquor licenses distributed in their city or town. It didn't make the cut. Neither did a proposal to pause admissions reforms at vocational and technical schools. State policymakers are trying to budget at a time of upheaval in Washington, where Republican leaders are pushing sprawling legislation through the US Senate that could Advertisement The state has been That could create some headaches in the weeks ahead, including a potential budget gap policymakers will need to decide how to fill. The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed budget watchdog, said last week that tax revenue may come in at least $600 million below what state officials had initially projected for the fiscal year that starts Tuesday. That projection didn't even account for potential impacts of the Trump administration's trade policies or the chance of an economic downturn, which the foundation House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen E. Spilka said in a joint statement that the plan would 'make Massachusetts more affordable, and will protect our most vulnerable residents.' 'As President Trump and Congressional Republicans continue to pursue devastating cuts to programs that millions of Americans rely on, we recognize the heightened importance of passing a fiscally responsible budget that invests in the areas that we value most,' the Democrats said. Advertisement Sunday's announcement marked a bit of relatively speedy deal-making for lawmakers. Should they whisk the agreement to Healey's desk on Monday as expected, it would be the first time since 2016 that they passed a budget deal before the start of the fiscal year. Still, Healey has 10 days to decide whether to sign, veto, or amend parts of the plan. That makes likely this the 15 straight year the state will begin the year 'She still has the opportunity to put some of her fingerprints on the budget, and we would never deny her that opportunity,' Rodrigues said of Healey. Samantha J. Gross can be reached at