Supreme Court to rule on race-conscious redistricting
Louisiana recently conducted redistricting in response to a federal court order against the previous voting district map. It was deemed unconstitutional. Redistricting was conducted resulting in Blacks having another district. However, this new map was challenged as unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. A District Court panel agreed with those who challenged the new voting district. The case is in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has called on both sides to present their argument based on the parameters that the justices provided.
From The Post Millennial:
A group of voters who identified themselves as non-black challenged the 2024 map in federal court, arguing it constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. A three-judge district court agreed, but the Supreme Court later paused that ruling, allowing the 2024 map to be used in the election.
On Friday, the justices asked the parties involved to file new briefs on whether the “intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.” Oral arguments were held in March, but the Court did not issue a decision before its summer recess. In June, it signaled it would revisit the case with additional questions for briefing.
If the Court ultimately rules that race-conscious redistricting is unconstitutional, it could significantly restrict how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is applied in future cases. That provision prohibits race-based discrimination in voting laws and has long been used to challenge district lines seen as weakening minority representation.
According to a report by Politico, striking down Louisiana’s current map could lead to Republicans regaining one of the state’s congressional seats. Currently, both majority-black districts are represented by Democrats, while the remaining four are held by Republicans.
Additional Reading:
Cunningham, H. (2025, August 2). Supreme Court to consider ban on race-based congressional redistricting to narrow Voting Rights Act. The Post Millennial. Link.
Category: Society
I wonder how or if that is going to affect the fight in Texas over redistricting. The dems, as is no surprise, are claiming race as the reason to refuse the change in districting. Of course they fled the state to prevent the vote. Ironically, they fled to areas notorious for race based dem redistricting.
Texas has issued warrants to arrest all those who fled.
They may lose their seats, and have new representatives appointed in their stead.
Because they have been soliciting contributions to pay the $500/day fines for not being there, they may get felony charges of accepting bribes – ending up in jail time.
Gov. Abbot is not playing.
If they went to jail that would be too bad. Normally this is politics, but in this case they failed in their duty to the state and the people to do their job. Getting cash from George Soros to not do their job is disgusting.
Well, they are (D)emon-rats, so basically “disgusting” is SOP.
Isn’t that extortion?
The warrants issued are civil warrants, not criminal. I doubt there is a chance of any jail time in that case. Fines, probably but no grey bar accommodations.
I thought justice was suppossed to be color blind.
In a perfect world – how about enforcing, perhaps via a Federal law insofar as this is about Federal representation – that Districts are to be contiguous, based on census and regardless of race or political affiliation? That would by default mean many all Black, Hispanic, White, polka dot or whatever Districts, particularly in larger population centers. One would think that would make the Dems happy. But no, it’s about power, or more correctly diluting power for the other side.
The accusation this is what Texas is doing too may hold water, I don’t know because I don’t live in Texas and am not knowledgeable enough about the areas and demographics there. But it is the absolute truth in Illinois, where some of the Texas politicians have run to “on vacation” to avoid the vote down there.
Why to Illinois? Because this Democrat stronghold will protect them, give them a megaphone and carefully control the local media. The inherent hypocrisy in Illinois having some of the most ridiculously blatant gerrymandered Districts seems to be lost on them and the media.
Gawd I loathe these politicians. Almost as much as those bobbleheads that vote for them.
This is a warm up for the 2030 redistricting of congressional seats. California and New York are going to lose at least ten blue seats, all going to red states.
If true, this will be more glorious schadenfreude than we could have imagined.
Abbot needs to keep on keeping on. Arrest warrants issued, check. Replace them, (hopefully) check. Next up, the Dems will take it to the Supreme Court.
Let them. I doubt gerrymandering can survive a Constitutional challenge, meaning Dems will be set to lose control over how many states? At least, the “other sides” will have a better chance of some real representation and voice in those States.
I’m stocking up on popcorn. This could shape up to be really, really fun to watch.
Gerrymandering in of Itself has been to the SCOTUS and certain rules were placed on it such as the districts must be contiguous. The only issues might be some kind of civil rights violation. It doesn’t help that blacks are 66% Democrats,.which is a huge drop.in recent years.
Part of the problem with their numbers is they don’t consider Rs to be anything but Caucasian even when they clearly are not like Ted Cruz (Rafael Cruz) who is Hispanic and speaks English as a second language.
More to the point, Ted Cruz is a first generation offspring of Cuban refugee/immigrant parents who know what socialism is all about.
Maybe, Cruz senior fled in 1957, years before the rise of Castro. He disliked Batista who was an authoritarian statist and a tool of the US
How about a spectacularly novel idea; take the census data and a ruler (or any other straight edge) and a calculator and make the voting districts as equal as possible based on the total number of CITIZENS residing in that state. The color of the local population’s skin does not and should not factor into a dam thing.
As always, your milage may vary.
Shouldn’t even be difficult to program some computer to do it. Let the chips (and district lines) fall where they may.
I’m good with that. Draw the lines based on population. Ignore race, party, or any other box you want to create.
It’s okay when the Dems do it as our Anonymous would say.
Hope I’m not being a plagiarist……….
Lars tears.
Coloring in the lines is hard.
All of their biggest outrages in regards to Trumpism is when Trump plays the game like a Democrat. They really hate that.
Trump was a Democrat until he ran for President.
So it takes a former Dem to know the Dems.
It’s fun to watch when words and deeds the dems use is turned on them and used the same way.
Here’s the new map in my state. The deep red part is mostly farm fields and small towns while the new blue segment stretches through the larger cities, densely populated areas and (liberal) college towns.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2022/politics/us-redistricting/illinois-redistricting-map/
I thought this had been addressed at the Federal level.
I guess I was wrong.
As usual, the D-rats are getting what they’ve dished out in the past, and can’t handle it to the point where they scream for the courts to rig things back in their favor!