Most People Have No Idea What’s About To Happen To Democrats After Supreme Court Ruling! ~ Elon
Louisiana v. Callais (Docket 24-109/24-110) This is a redistricting/gerrymandering case. The issue: Did race dominate the drawing of the map? Could affect the scope of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The State of Louisiana passed a law (Senate Bill 8) that drew new congressional districts, including a second majority-Black district (District 6).
Legal Information Institute
The American Redistricting Project
Opponents say that although the legislature claimed the map was to comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), race actually “predominated” the drawing of the map meaning racial considerations were primary rather than incidental.
Department of Justice
The legal question: Did the legislature act unconstitutionally under the 14th or 15th Amendment when it drew the map in this way? Or put another way: Was the map an unlawful “racial gerrymander”?
Legal Information Institute
Key procedural dates
The Supreme Court granted review on November 4, 2024.
Justia Law
Oral argument was held March 24, 2025.
Supreme Court
On June 27, 2025, the Court ordered re-argument (“reargued”) later in the term.
Congress.gov
Rearmament set for October 15, 2025.
Legal Information Institute
The case has implications for how the VRA (especially Section 2) is applied and how the Constitution treats race in redistricting.
Legal Defense Fund
The outcome could affect how states draw electoral maps and whether race-based remedial districts are permissible under the Constitution.
Because Louisiana is representative of many states with similar demographic and legal dynamics, the decision could have nationwide ripple effects.
Here’s a breakdown of what each side is arguing in Louisiana v. Callais (Docket 24-109/24-110) and what the possible outcomes and their wider implications could be.
What the parties are arguing
State of Louisiana’s position
Louisiana says the map (Senate Bill 8) that creates a second majority-Black congressional district is a valid remedy under Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) to address vote‐dilution of Black voters.
Legal Defense Fund
But noticeably, for the re-argument the state has taken a broader stance: it argues all race-based redistricting is unconstitutional meaning even remediating under VRA may not justify considering race.
Brennan Center for Justice
The state also contends that the court should examine whether creating a majority-minority district as a remedy under Section 2 of the VRA violates the 14th or 15th Amendment.
Brennan Center for Justice
Legal Information Institute
Challengers / Voting rights advocates (Black voters civil‐rights organizations)
They argue that Louisiana’s original map (2022) diluted Black voters’ power (provided only one majority‐Black district despite Black voters being 1/3 of the population) and thus violated Section 2 of the VRA.
Legal Defense Fund
They say the remedial map with the second majority‐Black district does comply with both the VRA and the Constitutional protections (14th Amendment Equal Protection) and is narrowly tailored to fix the discrimination.
Legal Defense Fund
They warn that if the court limits or invalidates race‐based remedies under Section 2, it could severely weaken minority representation nationwide.
Common Cause
The central legal conflict
On one side: The VRA (Section 2) says racial minorities must not have voting power diluted. Lower courts held Louisiana likely violated that by under‐representing Black voters.
Legal Defense Fund
On the other: The Constitution (14th/15th Amendments) prohibits states from drawing district lines where race is the predominant factor (a “racial gerrymander”) unless narrowly tailored to a compelling interest.
SCOTUS blog
Thus: If the remedial map relied too much on race, it may be invalid even though the purpose was to fix discrimination. That tension is at the heart of the case.
League of Women Voters
1. Court upholds remedial map under VRA & constitutional tests
Means the second majority‐Black district stands.
Affirms that complying with Section 2 of the VRA remains a compelling interest that can justify race‐conscious redistricting.
Maintains the status quo for minority representation and preserves a widely used legal tool for voting‐rights litigation.
Other states may continue to draw remedial majority‐minority districts when evidence of dilution exists.
2. Court strikes down remedial map (or severely limits race‐based remedial maps)
Could hold that creating majority‐minority districts even under Section 2 violates the 14th/15th Amendments unless race is not the predominant factor.
Would significantly weaken Section 2’s reach, making it much harder for minority voters to challenge maps that dilute their power.
Center for American Progress
States could redraw maps that reduce the number of majority‐minority districts; minority voters could lose representation.
Could shift political impact: if protections for minority representation drop, power might tilt toward majorities and states with less diversity or stronger majority blocs.
3. Court crafts a middle‐ground or narrow ruling
It might allow remedial maps but impose stricter standards (e.g., time limits, higher burden to show discrimination).
For example: Race‐based remedies permissible, but only until certain date or only where discrimination shown by more recent data.
That would still restrict future remedial efforts but not eliminate them entirely.
Why this case matters beyond Louisiana
It could reshape how the VRA is applied nationwide: if the court says that remedial majority‐minority districts under Section 2 are no longer valid, many existing districts could be challenged.
Center for American Progress
It raises the question: Is complying with the VRA still a “compelling interest” that can justify using race as a factor in redistricting? If not, that changes decades of precedent.
League of Women Voters
It affects democracy: Minority voter representation, fair districts, and how states draw maps in multi‐racial societies are all on the line.
Legal Defense Fund
The decision will likely impact upcoming elections, especially in the South and states where minority populations are substantial but underrepresented.
The US Supreme Court granted review of the case (docket Nos. 24-109 / 24-110). SCOTUSblog Legal Information Institute
Oral argument was held March 24, 2025. League of Women Voters SCOTUSblog
On June 27, 2025, the Court issued an order for re-argument in the following term (Fall 2025). Supreme Court American Civil Liberties Union
The key question in the re-argument will include: Is the remedial creation of a second majority-Black district under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (Section 2) still consistent with the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments? League of Women Voters Legal Defense Fund.
Because the Court has not yet issued a full merits decision, there is no final substantive ruling that alters the map or definitively changes precedent.
The Court allowed the map with the second majority-Black district to stand in the interim so that the 2024 congressional elections in Louisiana could proceed using it. (This was part of a stay order earlier in the procedural history.) Wikipedia
The June 27, 2025, order for re-argument is itself a meaningful decision it signals that the Court thinks this is a major, unclear question worthy of further briefing and argument. American Civil Liberties Union
The Court’s decision to re-argue suggests they may be considering limiting or altering how Section 2 of the VRA is applied in redistricting. Center for American Progress League of Women Voters
If the Court were to hold that complying with Section 2 is not a sufficient “compelling interest” to allow race to be a predominant factor in drawing districts, that would mark a major shift in voting‐rights law. League of Women Voters
The timing is important: because the map is already in use for elections, any decision could have immediate impact in forthcoming election cycles. Louisiana Illuminator
No final merits ruling yet in Louisiana v. Callais. The Court hasn’t yet decided whether the map is unconstitutional or not under the law. What we have is a major indicator: the case will be re-argued because the Court sees weighty questions about race, the VRA, and constitutional protections. Once the ruling happens, it could reshape how redistricting and minority‐representation issues are handled across the U.S.
We don’t have a definite date for the Louisiana v. Callais ruling yet.
The case was originally argued on March 24, 2025.
League of Women Voters
SCOTUS blog
The Court later ordered a re-argument for October 15, 2025.
Legal Information Institute
The Federalist Society
Because of the re-argument, the decision will be delayed likely until the Court’s 2025-2026 term.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) is one of the most powerful and important civil rights laws in American history. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on August 6, 1965, during the height of the Civil Rights Movement mainly to stop racial discrimination in voting, especially in the South.
Even after the 15th Amendment (1870) made it illegal to deny the right to vote based on race, many states found ways to get around it.
They used:
Poll taxes (charging people to vote)
Literacy tests (used to fail Black voters unfairly)
Intimidation and violence at polling places
The turning point came after the Selma to Montgomery marches in Alabama, where peaceful civil rights protesters were attacked by police. That outrage pushed Congress to act, leading to the Voting Rights Act.
Section The heart of the law.
It bans any voting practice or procedure that discriminates based on race or color.
This is the section used in modern cases like Louisiana v. Callais, where plaintiffs argue that the way voting districts are drawn dilutes minority voting power.
Section 4(b) Created a formula to identify which states had a history of discrimination in voting.
These states had to get special federal permission before changing their voting laws.
Section 5 Known as “preclearance.”
Those states had to get approval from the U.S. Department of Justice or a federal court before making any changes to election laws to make sure the changes didn’t harm minority voters.
Supreme Court Challenges
Shelby County v. Holder (2013):
The Supreme Court struck down Section 4(b), which effectively ended the preclearance system.
Since then, states no longer have to get federal approval to change their voting laws and many quickly passed stricter ID laws and redistricting plans.
Brnovich v. DNC (2021):
The Court limited how Section 2 can be used to challenge discriminatory voting rules.
Louisiana v. Callais (2025):
The Court is now debating whether using race to fix discrimination under Section 2 violates the Constitution a case that could further weaken or redefine the VRA.
The VRA was designed to protect democracy itself to make sure every citizen’s vote carries equal weight. It turned the promise of the 15th Amendment into a working reality for millions of Americans who had been silenced for decades.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 made racial discrimination in voting illegal.
It’s the law that gave real force to the idea that every vote matters, and it’s still at the center of the fight over how free and fair American elections really are today.
14th Amendment
The 14th Amendment is one of the most important parts of the U.S. Constitution. It was ratified in 1868, right after the Civil War, and it’s meant to guarantee fairness, equality, and protection for all citizens.
1. Citizenship Clause
Anyone born or naturalized in the United States is automatically a U.S. citizen.
This ended the old rule that denied citizenship to enslaved people and their descendants.
2. Due Process Clause
No state can deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
Basically, the government has to follow fair legal procedures before punishing or taking rights away from someone.
3. Equal Protection Clause
Every person must be given equal protection of the laws.
It’s been used in landmark cases like Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which ended segregation in schools, and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which legalized same-sex marriage.
The 14th Amendment is the foundation for most modern civil rights cases. It’s used to challenge discrimination by governments whether that’s about race, gender, religion, or political representation.
In Louisiana v. Callais, for example, the Equal Protection Clause is what’s being debated. The question is whether the state’s redistricting map (which created a majority-Black district) is constitutional or whether race played too large a role in drawing it.
The 14th Amendment is about fairness. It says every person deserves the same legal protection and that the government must play by the rules when it comes to people’s rights. Without it, modern American democracy would look completely different.
15th Amendment
The 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1870, just a few years after the Civil War. It’s short, but it changed American history in a huge way it gave Black men the right to vote and laid the foundation for later civil rights movements.
The 15th Amendment says:
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
In simple terms, that means the government federal or state can’t stop someone from voting because of their race or because they used to be enslaved.
After the Civil War, even though slavery was abolished (13th Amendment) and citizenship was guaranteed (14th Amendment), many Southern states tried to keep Black Americans from voting.
They used poll taxes, literacy tests, and violence to stop them.
The 15th Amendment was meant to stop that to protect the right to vote for all men, regardless of race. (Women didn’t gain the right to vote until the 19th Amendment in 1920.)
Even though it was passed over 150 years ago, the 15th Amendment still matters. It’s the legal backbone of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which protects minority voters from discrimination in elections.
In cases like Louisiana v. Callais, the 15th Amendment is part of the debate it’s about whether the state’s election maps weaken the voting power of Black citizens, which could violate the 15th’s promise of equal voting rights.
In short
The 15th Amendment stands for one of America’s most basic ideas:
Every citizen’s vote should count equally, no matter their race.
It’s one of the key pillars along with the 13th and 14th Amendments that built the foundation for civil rights and equality in America.
How to track the decision date
Visit the official Supreme Court website’s docket page for the case: supremecourt.gov → Docket 24-110 and Docket 24-109. Supreme Court SCOTUSblog
Check reputable news sites (like SCOTUSblog, The Guardian, Politico) for announcements of the opinion date. For example, SCOTUSblog lists the case as one of the remaining ones for decision in June 2025. SCOTUSblog.
Watch for the release of the opinion itself (they usually publish at 10 a.m. EDT on decision days). The Supreme Court website posts new opinions under “Opinions of the Court.”
Sign up for alerts/newsletters from legal-news services (e.g., SCOTUSblog, Brennan Center) so you’ll get notified when the decision drops.
The Court has re-argued this case: they heard initial arguments on March 24, 2025, and then ordered re-argument for October 15, 2025. aclu.org 2Supreme Court Because of that, a final decision is expected after the re-argument in the 2025-26 term not immediately.
Here’s the page on SCOTUSblog for the case Louisiana v. Callais (Docket 24-109 / 24-110):
Louisiana v. Callais SCOTUSblog Case File
SCOTUSblog
On that page you’ll find:
Background of the dispute, legal issues, and the procedural history.
SCOTUSblog
Key dates (e.g., initial argument March 24 2025; re-argument scheduled October 15, 2025).
Legal Information Institute
The Federalist Society
Recent briefs, filings, commentary on how the case may affect the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and constitutional law.
SCOTUSblog
SCOTUSblog- Louisiana v. Callais → CLICK HERE
SCOTUSblog → CLICK HERE
Most People Have No Idea What’s About To Happen To Democrats After Supreme Court Ruling! ~ Elon