Supreme Court Delays Ruling on Louisiana’s Second Majority‑Black District, Rehearing Slated Next Term

Supreme Court Delays Ruling on Louisiana’s Second Majority‑Black District, Rehearing Slated Next Term

On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to issue a final verdict on Louisiana’s revised congressional map, which added a second majority‑Black district following a lower court’s finding that the state’s original 2022 map violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black representation. Instead, the high court will rehear the case during its next term that begins in October. Justice Thomas included a dissent with the rehearing order. The challenge stems from non‑Black voters who argue the updated map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. A three‑judge panel blocked the map, but the Court previously permitted its use in the 2024 election…
Read More
U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument : Louisiana v. Callais (Congressional Map)

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument : Louisiana v. Callais (Congressional Map)

During the Supreme Court oral argument in Louisiana v. Callais on March 24, 2025, the central issue was whether the congressional map enacted by Louisiana in 2024 appropriately balanced constitutional protections and the requirements of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The Legal Defense Fund (LDF), represented by Stuart Naifeh, argued that the map should be upheld as it fairly acknowledged the political power of Black Louisianians, who constitute one-third of the state's population, by creating two majority-Black districts. This was in contrast to a previous map from 2022 deemed likely to violate the VRA by having only one majority-Black district.…
Read More
ELB Podcast: U.S. Democracy and the Independent State Legislature Theory after Moore v. Harper

ELB Podcast: U.S. Democracy and the Independent State Legislature Theory after Moore v. Harper

Listen to the Election Law Blog Podcast's voting rights roundtable discussion of Moore v. Harper. Derek Muller, Carolyn Shapiro, Bertrall Ross, and Rick Pildes discuss what the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision means for future elections. https://soundcloud.com/rick-hasen/elb-podcast-410?si=22034ab3b3ea4e24bb0205f33a2ffbc4&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing Find us on:
Read More
U.S. Supreme Court Makes “Surprise” Decision Striking Alabama’s Congressional Map

U.S. Supreme Court Makes “Surprise” Decision Striking Alabama’s Congressional Map

On Thursday the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Alabama District Court's preliminary injunction against the state's 2021 Congressional map on grounds that it diluted the votes of Black voters in the state in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The 5-4 decision ensures that Alabama's 7 district congressional map, which included only one with a majority of Black voters - will have to be redrawn to include an additional minority Black district. African Americans make up more than a quarter of the state’s population. The decision has implications for Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas as well. It is…
Read More
U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument Audio and Analysis of Pivotal Alabama Voting Rights Act Case

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument Audio and Analysis of Pivotal Alabama Voting Rights Act Case

On Tuesday, Oct. 4, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Merrill v. Milligan regarding Alabama Congressional Redistricting. Listen to the Oral Argument on YouTube. Last January, a three-judge district court in Alabama had agreed that the state’s new congressional map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A divided Supreme Court temporarily blocked that ruling in February and after nearly two hours of oral argument on Tuesday, the justices appeared inclined to permanently set aside the district court’s ruling according to Amy Howe of SCOTUSblog. The crux of the state of Alabama's argument is that the…
Read More
U.S. Supreme Court Denies Stay Request in Pennsylvania Congressional Map Challenge

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Stay Request in Pennsylvania Congressional Map Challenge

Pennsylvania's new congressional map was adopted by the State Supreme Court in February -after the governor vetoed the legislature's map - but a new lawsuit is looking to federal courts to allow the state's congressional representatives to be elected at large in the upcoming 2022 election. On March 7, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an emergency stay order request that would have accomplished this quickly. Instead, the matter is before a three-judge court whose decision may be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. The crux of the challenge is that the State Supreme Court does not have the authority…
Read More

Alabama Appeals Congressional Map Decision to U.S. Supreme Court

On Friday, Jan 28, the state of Alabama filed a motion for an administrative stay to the U.S. Supreme Court as well as a request for an appeal directly to the court from Monday's ruling of a three-judge federal district court. The panel of judges had enjoined the use of the newly drawn Alabama congressional district map on its finding that the map likely violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The federal district court panel concluded last week that the congressional map should have 2 majority-Black districts (or districts in which Black voters would be able to choose…
Read More
December Redistricting Update

December Redistricting Update

December was all about the apportionment numbers when it comes to redistricting news. Let's get you up-to-date. White House Memo on Excluding “Aliens” from the Official Apportionment Count The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Trump v. New York on Nov. 30 pursuant to an expedited schedule given that the U.S. Census Bureau had a Dec 31 statutory deadline to report the official state population counts to be used for apportioning U.S. House seats among the states. Just before Christmas, the court released a per curiam opinion declining to decide the issue on technical grounds. The issue being whether…
Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Decides Not to Decide Illegal Immigrant Apportionment Case

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that the White House request to the Census Bureau to modify the population count to exclude undocumented immigrants was not ripe. The per curiam opinion explained that it was premature to resolve the issue of whether the order was constitutional since there were no apportionment numbers available at the time of the oral argument and there was no certainty how the Bureau would implement the memorandum. The wording of the memorandum ordering the Census Bureau to modify the population count gave considerable latitude to officials regarding how and to what extent it would…
Read More

Listen: Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump Apportionment / Citizenship Case

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Trump v. New York. This case challenged an executive memo directing the Census Bureau to report official congressional apportionment data so that it excludes the count of non-citizens. For an in-depth analysis of the arguments, read SCOTUSBlog.com's report. Most expert observers say the court seemed preoccupied with the "ripeness" of the issue, or in layman's parlance - whether or not the administration has done anything yet that could possibly violate a statute or the constitution. Listen to the audio below. https://youtu.be/ePChyVCpI6A
Read More