Story perspectives

Supreme Court Blocks Louisiana’s Racial Gerrymandered Map

4/30/2026

36 4

Summary

Story summary

The Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
It is the first decision since 2013 limiting race use under Voting Rights Act.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the map relied on race without a compelling interest, violating Constitution.
Justice Elena Kagan dissented, warning Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act becomes a dead letter, while Mississippi and Florida governors announced sessions to redraw districts before primaries.

History

Historical Context

After the Supreme Court’s unanimous 1986 decision in Thornburg v. Gingles—authored by Justice William J. Brennan and establishing three vote-dilution preconditions—later cases such as Shaw v. Reno (1993) and Bartlett v. Strickland (2009) refined Section 2 analysis. The Court’s 2024 ruling striking Louisiana’s congressional map invoked Gingles, reviving rigorous Section 2 scrutiny for future redistricting battles.

1 of 2

Story summary

The Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
It is the first decision since 2013 limiting race use under Voting Rights Act.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the map relied on race without a compelling interest, violating Constitution.
Justice Elena Kagan dissented, warning Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act becomes a dead letter, while Mississippi and Florida governors announced sessions to redraw districts before primaries.

1 / 2