A federal court in Louisiana has invalidated a newly drawn congressional map that included a second majority-Black district, ruling that it was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The judges found that race was the predominant factor in creating the new 6th Congressional District, which cut across the state. The decision, made by two judges nominated by President Donald Trump, could have significant implications for the upcoming elections and the balance of power in the US House.
An appeal to the US Supreme Court is likely, as state officials need to know the district boundaries by May 15 to prepare for the fall elections. Democratic redistricting groups, led by former US Attorney General Eric Holder, are expected to file for an emergency stay to keep the map in place. This ruling comes after a series of legal battles over redistricting in Louisiana and other states following the 2020 census, with control of the House potentially coming down to just a few seats.
The new district lines in Louisiana were approved by the GOP-controlled Legislature to comply with a federal court order that found the state in violation of the Voting Rights Act. The creation of a second majority-Black district in the state was seen as a win for voting rights activists and could have impacted the balance of power in the House, where Republicans currently hold a slim majority. The decision puts the reelection chances of Republican Rep. Garret Graves, the current 6th District officeholder, at risk.
Supporters of the Legislature’s map argued that political factors, rather than race, influenced its creation. However, a legal challenge by non-Black voters argued that the new district violated the US Constitution’s equal protection clause. The majority on the court sided with the challengers, finding that race was the predominant factor in drawing the district boundaries. Eric Holder criticized the ruling, stating that it jeopardizes the voting rights of Louisianians and calling for the state lawmakers’ approved map to be used in the upcoming election.
The ruling in Louisiana highlights the contentious nature of redistricting and the potential impact on electoral outcomes. With control of the House potentially hanging in the balance, legal battles over redistricting have taken center stage in many states. The decision to invalidate the map in Louisiana could set a precedent for similar challenges in other states, as both parties seek to gain an advantage in the upcoming elections. The outcome of this case will likely have far-reaching implications for future redistricting efforts and the political landscape in the United States.
