Supreme Court to hear Louisiana redistricting case
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
/2025/03/21/1742578387821.gif?w=3840)
Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios
Monday marks the beginning of the end of Louisiana's redistricting saga as the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments over the state's congressional map.
Why it matters: The decision could both reshape Louisiana politics and reframe how the Voting Rights Act is applied to redistricting in other states.
The big picture: Key to the Supreme Court ruling will be whether Louisiana violated the Equal Protection Clause in its lawmakers' efforts to comply with the Voting Rights Act, two tough-to-balance landmark pieces of federal law.
Friction point: The Voting Rights Act is meant to protect minority voters. In some cases, including Louisiana, congressional maps get redrawn to ensure minority voters represent a majority of those within a district.
- Yet the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment also says states can't draw maps based on racial gerrymandering.
Catch up quick: Redistricting happens when updated census numbers are released every decade, but the congressional map that Louisiana lawmakers came up with after the 2020 census in caught the attention of civil rights groups.
- Those groups sued the state in federal court, arguing that the new map violated the Voting Rights Act by not fairly representing Black voters, who make up about a third of Louisiana's population, but a majority of one of the map's six districts.
- A federal judge sided with the civil rights groups in 2022 and ordered state lawmakers to redraw the maps.
And they did. But then another group of plaintiffs who self-described as "non-African Americans" sued the state for relying too heavily on race when it was redrawn, the AP reported.
- A panel of three judges sided with the plaintiffs, setting up competing federal decisions over the same map, and told state to go back to the drawing board yet again.
Yes, but: The Supreme Court did allow the state to use its latest map version for last fall's congressional election, which led to voters to send Cleo Fields to Congress, giving Louisiana its second Black representative and the second Democrat in its delegation.
What they're saying: "The Supreme Court needs to provide instructions to state legislatures so states are not on a perpetual federal litigation roller coaster over good faith efforts at redistricting," Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement over the weekend. "It's very confusing to voters, it's expensive for taxpayers, and it's inconsistent with the Constitution.""
What's next: There is no set timeline for Supreme Court decisions. They usually arrive after oral arguments finish in April, and before the court recesses, typically in late June.