It remains to be seen how the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on a congressional redistricting case in Louisiana will impact the political landscape.
Critics say the court’s ruling Wednesday that the creation of a Black-majority congressional district in Louisiana represented “unconstitutional racial gerrymander” could open the door for more challenges of similarly drawn districts nationwide.
Proponents of the ruling pushed back against race-based decisions guiding the process of drawing congressional maps in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
At the heart of the case is a provision of the Voting Rights Act known as Section 2. Here’s a closer look at the provision.
What does Section 2 say?
Section 2 was designed to prevent voting practices or procedures from discriminating on the basis of race, color or membership in one of four “language minority groups,” including citizens of American Indian, Asian American, Alaskan Native or Spanish heritage.
“A violation of this (provision) is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the state or political subdivision are not equally open to participation by members of a class of citizens protected” by the law, Section 2 reads.
Such discrimination would give members of the protected classes of citizens “less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice,” Section 2 adds.
What impact has Section 2 had?
Congress is far more diverse than it was before the Voting Rights Act was adopted in 1965 — in part, because of protections and legal challenges related to Section 2.
Over the past decade alone, federal courts have ordered changes to 29 maps or electoral systems based on Section 2 arguments, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The court orders included changes to congressional maps in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana; legislative maps in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota and Washington; and 19 local government maps or at-large electoral systems.
The Brennan Center said more than a dozen Section 2 challenges are pending in courts across the country, including one that originated in Hazleton in Pennsylvania’s Luzerne County. A federal lawsuit alleged that Hazleton’s at-large system of electing council members citywide instead of by districts “results in Hispanic citizens not having an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of their choice,” The Associated Press reported.
Election law expert Nicholas Stephanopoulos estimates that nearly 70 of the nation’s 435 congressional districts are protected by Section 2.
That includes 15 majority-Black districts, 10 districts where Black voters make up 45% to 49% (near majority) of the voting-age population, 38 majority-Hispanic districts, two near majority-Hispanic districts, two majority-Asian American districts and one near majority-Asian American district.
Minorities represent a record 26% of the voting members of the 119th Congress (2025-26), according to the Pew Research Center. In 1945, non-white lawmakers made up just 1% of the House and Senate, Pew said.
What did the court say?
For decades, people have been able to contest maps that dilute the voting power of minorities by showing that the maps had discriminatory results, regardless of whether the mapmakers intended to discriminate.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court said plaintiffs must now prove “strong inference of intentional discrimination.”
“Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act was designed to enforce the Constitution — not collide with it,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court’s majority opinion. “Unfortunately, lower courts have sometimes applied this court’s precedents in a way that forces states to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids.”
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan wrote, “The consequences (of the ruling) are likely to be far-reaching and grave. Today’s decision renders Section 2 all but a dead letter.”
“In the states where that law continues to matter — the states still marked by residential segregation and racially polarized voting — minority voters can now be cracked out of the electoral process,” Kagan wrote, referring to the gerrymandering tactic where the voting power of a particular group can be diminished by breaking up, or cracking, its members across multiple districts.