I read the whole opinion so you do not have to. On April 29, 2026, by a vote of 6 to 3, the Supreme Court decided Louisiana v. Callais, and in it the majority took a wrecking ball to what was left of the Voting Rights Act. [1] Here is the case, laid out the way I would lay out any other: the charge, the holding, and the cost.
THE CASE
- Louisiana drew a second majority-Black district, which elected two Black members of Congress for the first time in the state's history [4]
- The Court, 6-3, called that district an unconstitutional racial gerrymander
- Justice Alito wrote for the majority
Louisiana v. Callais, decided April 29, 2026 [1]
Follow the logic, because it is the whole game. For sixty years, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act told states they could not draw maps that dilute the votes of Black citizens. [2] Louisiana, under a lower-court order to stop diluting Black votes, drew the second district to comply. The Supreme Court then held that drawing it was itself unconstitutional, and lifted the bar for proving vote dilution to something near proof that a state intended to discriminate because of race. [1][2] A law written to stop the dilution of Black votes now makes it harder to challenge that dilution. That is not a loophole. That is the holding.
WHAT THE RULING DOES
- Section 2 vote-dilution claims now face a much tougher standard [2]
- States get a green light to redraw maps that erase majority-minority districts [3]
- The timing lands right before the midterm elections [3]
Here is the verdict, and I take no pleasure in delivering it. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was the law that finally made the Fifteenth Amendment mean something, the promise that the vote cannot be denied or diluted on account of race. Six justices did not repeal it. They hollowed it out, which is quieter and just as effective. The districts that gave Black Louisianans a voice in Congress are now the evidence used against them. Read the opinion yourself. The citation is right here, and the record speaks plainly.
