Louisiana v. Callais: Searching for Good Trouble in the Gerrymandering Gumbo
By Carrie Phillips
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) was passed during the height of the Civil Rights Movement and was amended five times to expand its protections. The purpose was to enforce voting rights protected by the 14th and 15th Amendments and secure the right to vote for racial minorities. In general, it protects voting rights nationwide, but specifically it prohibits state and local government from imposing any rules that could deny any citizen’s right to vote due to race or color or spoken language.
Up until that point, it was common for literacy tests and similar devices that were used to disenfranchise racial minorities, in addition to violence. States, mostly southern, passed laws that imposed voting restrictions, poll taxes, property-ownership requirements, and grandfather clauses (only allowed you to vote if your grandfather had been allowed to). These were an important component of the Jim Crow laws, which promoted racial segregation and the United States Supreme Court (USSC) generally upheld. Several Civil Rights laws were passed, starting in 1957, to begin protecting minority voters’ rights, including the creation of the Civil Rights Division of the Dept of Justice and the Commission on Civil Rights.
Research shows that the VRA had successfully increased minority voter registration and turnout. It also is linked to community improvements, including better public education in minority areas, more members of Congress voting for civil-rights legislation and greater minority representation in local, state and national offices.
Since 2013, the USSC has weakened the VRA, most often under the argument that with such strong minority voter turnout, the protections are no longer needed. They continued that with the Louisiana v. Callais decision. The USSC ruling states that in order to violate the VRA, a challenger must prove that a state intentionally drew its districts to give minority voters less opportunity because of their race and must unravel race from the state’s considerations. Most analysts believe this to be impossible to prove. More concerning was the inclusion that the VRA should have never given racial groups an “entitlement to roughly proportional representation”. Rather than see the results of the VRA as having been proof that the legislation was performing as it intended, the USSC used it to determine that it was no longer needed. As of this writing, 10 Republican states have, are in the process of, or are preparing to redraw their districts to eliminate seats currently held by elected Democrats. Louisiana has halted primary voting that had already begun to allow them to redraw their districts for the 2026 election, with an estimated 40k early ballots being discarded. Alabama reverted to a map that the USSC had previously called unconstitutional, with them also allowing the map to be used for the current year elections. Tennessee is removing their one minority district and has punished Democrats in the State Legislature for protesting the move by removing them from the committees they served on.
While some states with Democratic leadership are also looking to redraw their district maps, they are doing so with voter amendments, ensuring the will of the voters is heard. The success of those votes will likely depend on the USSC, as they are being challenged in court. Historically, the Purcell principle prevented courts from changing election rules too close to an election. It resulted from a 2006 USSC and is used frequently in rulings related to elections, voting requirements and maps. However, the USSC is no longer consistently using the principle, allowing states to cancel primaries and throw out ballots.
In addition to redistricting to prevent or reduce minority representation in government, many states have passed or considered laws making voting more difficult. Twenty-three states require a photo ID to vote, some specifically a government issued ID. Additionally, some states are working to prevent college students from voting in the district they are residing in while attending. Federally, the Save America Act is an attempt to require proof of citizenship at the polls, potentially disenfranchising anyone whose current name does not match their birth certificate. This bill would also add complications to mail-in voting, disenfranchising voters with disabilities and the elderly.
Trump has gone so far as to issue an Executive Order to restrict voting, federalizing the voter rolls, despite elections being under the purview of states. That along with the changes made by USPS when postmark dates are added to mail, including voting ballots, create a great deal of concern about the counting of mail-in ballots. Most states count mailed-in ballots as long as they are postmarked on or before election day. Historically, mail was postmarked at the day it was dropped off at a post office, dropped into a mailbox or given to your carrier. The updated rules from USPS does not postmark the mail until it is processed at an automated sorting facility, which could be one to three days after it has been ‘mailed.’ This removes the control of the voters knowing if ballots are postmarked in time to be counted (and also causes issues for Federal, state, and local tax filings).
The rush to maintain political control, at the expense of the citizens, is reprehensible and anti-democratic. The 15th Amendment confirms our right to vote, without interference from the federal government or any state based on our race or color. The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana vs Callais will likely torpedo minority representation in the Southern States and weaken the Democratic Party’s chances of winning a House majority in the Midterms. Everyone deserves the right to be represented and diluting Democratic voters to ensure a Republican victory is no different than the literacy tests and poll taxes of a previous time. The prevention of voting for representation is still there and the heavy-hand of those currently in control of Republican state governments intends for that representation to be eliminated.
Sources:
Tracking state congressional redistricting efforts | CNN Politics
Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia
Tennessee Democrats stripped of House committee seats over redistricting protests | CNN
A court ruling could shrink Black representation in Congress : NPR
Federal judge blocks Indiana ban on student IDs as voter identification | Fox News
Enjoy this article? Please share it here on Substack and on other social media channels! Subscribe to our IndivisibleCLT podcast, and join our advocacy for representative democracy in North Carolina and throughout the United States.
Together, we are INDIVISIBLE.
Our vision is a democracy that represents all, engaging every voice in the shared process of governance to build a future that promotes justice and equity.
Our mission is to strengthen democracy through direct action to educate and engage community members.
More information is available about how to join Indivisible Charlotte and support our work!
