Today, in a very important 6-3 decision at the Supreme Court [Full pdf Ruling Here] the high court ruled in Louisiana -vs Callais that congressional districts drawn by considering race are an unconstitutional gerrymander. Race should not be a consideration in the drawing of district boundaries.
Chief Justice John Roberts had previously described Louisiana’s 6th Congressional District as a “snake” that stretches more than 200 miles (320 kilometers) to link parts of Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette and Baton Rouge. “That map is an unconstitutional gerrymander,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent for the three leftist, activist justices. “The consequences are likely to be far-reaching and grave. Today’s decision renders Section 2 all but a dead letter,” Kagan wrote, referencing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
(Via Politico) – […] Alito said a revised interpretation of Section 2 was needed in part because of the Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling that the Constitution does not prohibit gerrymandering for partisan purposes. As a result, he suggested, plaintiffs in voting discrimination lawsuits are now often “dressing their political-gerrymandering claims in racial garb.”
“Failing to account for political considerations in redistricting … can allow plaintiffs to undo a State’s legitimate, non-racial decisions under the banner of Section 2,” Alito wrote, appearing to express concern that Democrats could use voting rights lawsuits for partisan purposes rather than to target racial discrimination.
