Supreme Court seems inclined to limit race-based electoral districts under the Voting Rights Act

WASHINGTON (AP) —The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared inclined to limit the use of the Voting Rights Act to force states to draw race-based electoral districts. The court's six conservative justices, to one degree or another, seemed like they would vote to effectively strike down a Black majority House district in Louisiana because it relied too heavily on race.

The case, brought by Republican state officials, challenges the creation of two majority-Black districts ordered by a lower court. Supporters of the map say it prevents unconstitutional race-based gerrymandering, while civil rights advocates argue it would dilute minority voting power.

The Supreme Court’s six conservative justices indicated varying levels of skepticism about a Louisiana congressional district with a Black majority, questioning whether race played too central a role in how it was drawn.

The case could significantly affect the scope of the Voting Rights Act, landmark legislation from the Civil Rights era that sought to eliminate racial discrimination in voting.

A ruling for Louisiana could allow legislatures across the South to redraw congressional maps, potentially changing the number of majority Black and Latino districts, which in recent elections have tended to favor Democrats.

Two years ago, the court, in a 5-4 decision, affirmed a lower-court ruling that found a likely Voting Rights Act violation in a similar Alabama case. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the court’s three liberal justices in that outcome.

During Wednesday’s arguments, Roberts and Kavanaugh appeared to take a different tone, particularly in their questions to civil rights attorney Janai Nelson.

Roberts noted that the Alabama decision was closely tied to its specific facts and should not necessarily determine the outcome in Louisiana.

Kavanaugh asked whether it might be time to reconsider the use of race-based districting under the Voting Rights Act, rather than allowing it to continue indefinitely.

The court’s liberal justices emphasized the Voting Rights Act’s historic role in addressing discrimination in elections. Justice Elena Kagan said that redrawing districts is a remedy only when “a specific identified, proved violation of law” has been found.

The Supreme Court’s majority has questioned the role of race in public policy, including its 2023 decision that ended the use of affirmative action in college admissions. In 2013, the Court also ruled that parts of the Voting Rights Act requiring certain states to obtain federal approval before making election changes were no longer justified by current conditions.

The Court has previously held that partisan redistricting is largely a matter for state legislatures and courts to resolve. A decision narrowing or overturning Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act could further limit federal oversight of redistricting, allowing states greater discretion in drawing congressional districts.

Just two years ago, the court, by a 5-4 vote, affirmed a ruling that found a likely violation of the Voting Rights Act in a similar case over Alabama’s congressional map. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined their three more liberal colleagues in the outcome.

That decision led to new districts in both states that sent two more Black Democrats to Congress.

Now, though, the court has asked the parties to answer a fundamental question: “Whether the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.”

In the first arguments in the Louisiana case in March, Roberts described the district as a “snake” that stretches more than 200 miles to link parts of the Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette, and Baton Rouge areas.

The court fight over Louisiana’s congressional districts has lasted three years.

The state’s Republican-dominated legislature drew a new congressional map in 2022 to account for population shifts reflected in the 2020 census.  Civil rights advocates won a lower-court ruling that the districts likely discriminated against Black voters.

The state eventually drew a new map to comply with the court ruling, but white Louisiana voters claimed in their separate lawsuit that race was the predominant factor driving it. A three-judge court agreed, leading to the current high court case.

___

This story has been updated with details from the arguments.