Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is the federal law that has most directly shaped how local governments draw their district maps and structure their elections. It is a permanent, nationwide prohibition on any voting standard, practice, or procedure that results in the denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. The Act applies to every level of government, including county commissions, city councils, school boards, and judicial districts. In practice, the law has been most often invoked at the local level. Around half of all Section 2 cases have challenged the use of at-large elections for city councils, school boards, and other mostly nonpartisan local bodies, making local government the single most common battleground for VRA enforcement over the past four decades. The legal test that governs most of these cases was established in Thornburg v. Gingles (1986), which requires plaintiffs to show, among other things, that a minority community is sufficiently large and geographically compact to form a district, that it votes cohesively as a group, and that the white majority votes as a bloc to defeat minority-preferred candidates. Simply put: a local government that uses at-large elections or draws maps in ways that dilute the voting power of a racial minority group has long been vulnerable to a Section 2 challenge.
That legal landscape changed significantly on April 29, 2026, when the Supreme Court issued its 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais. The ruling significantly reworked the 40-year-old Gingles framework in three ways: it requires illustrative maps submitted by plaintiffs to meet all of a jurisdiction’s political objectives, including protection of incumbents; it requires plaintiffs to show that racial bloc voting cannot be explained by partisan affiliation; and it requires strong evidence of present-day intentional racial discrimination, giving less weight to historical discrimination and ongoing socioeconomic disparities. The Campaign Legal Center and other organizations say that as a result of the Callais decision, states and localities can defend against virtually any claim of racially discriminatory map-drawing simply by claiming they discriminated based on political party rather than race, even though race and partisanship are often difficult, if not impossible to disentangle, especially in the South. For local officials, this means the legal pressure that once prompted many cities and counties to convert from at-large to district-based elections has been significantly reduced. Whether that changes how local governments structure their elections going forward remains to be seen in the courts.
Local officials should also be aware that Section 2 does not operate in a vacuum. Section 2 had served as the primary nationwide protection against discriminatory voting systems following the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which eliminated the preclearance requirement that once required covered jurisdictions to get advance approval before changing their election systems. With both Shelby and now Callais narrowing federal protections, the practical enforceability of voting rights at the local level now depends increasingly on whether your state has enacted its own Voting Rights Act. Nine states, including California, New York, Virginia, and most recently Maryland, have passed state-level VRAs with varying provisions that may impose obligations on local governments independent of what federal law requires. Local officials should consult their jurisdiction’s legal counsel and monitor their state legislature to understand what obligations remain in place for their specific jurisdiction.
Things to Avoid
Don’t interpret Callais as a green light to do anything. While the ruling narrowed Section 2, it did not eliminate it. Intentional racial discrimination in redistricting remains unconstitutional under the 14th and 15th Amendments, regardless of Callais. Officials who read the ruling as permission to pack or crack minority communities, even under a stated partisan rationale, remain legally exposed, particularly in states with their own VRAs.
Don’t make election structure changes, particularly converting from district to at-large elections, without legal counsel. This is the single highest-risk action a local government can take in the current environment. Even under Callais, a jurisdiction with a documented history of racially polarized voting that eliminates single-member districts is likely to face litigation.
Find us on:
