Defending States’ Ability to Use the Voting Rights Act for Fair Maps (Louisiana v. Callais/Robinson v. Callais)

Following the 2020 Census, Louisiana diluted the voting strength of Black Louisianans by adopting an unfair congressional map that violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The discriminatory map only created one district where Black voters had an opportunity to elect their preferred candidates, even though two opportunity districts were now required based on the state’s population changes.  

The state’s unfair map was struck down, and Louisiana faced a choice. The Louisiana Legislature could either draw its own new map to comply with the VRA or allow a federal court to impose the new map. The Louisiana Legislature decided to take back control and draw its own VRA-compliant map with two opportunity districts.  

The new VRA-compliant map was in place for the 2024 General Election, which resulted in the historic seating of two Black Louisianans in Congress for the first time ever.

Now, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering a challenge to the newly adopted map by non-Black voters who allege that the 2024 VRA-compliant map is an illegal racial gerrymander.  

The state and a group of Black Louisianas are defending the map, arguing that race was not the predominate motivating factor when the Legislature drew the map because it was considering the VRA and the governor’s political objectives. They also argue that any use of race in drawing the district was justified because the second opportunity district was required in order to comply with Section 2 of the VRA.

In North Dakota, CLC represents MHA Nation and individual voters in Walen v. Burgum.  Because of this advocacy, North Dakota now has fair legislative districts. CLC is currently defending this victory before the U.S. Supreme Court.  Like the Louisiana case, Walen is another meritless racial gerrymandering challenge to a VRA-compliant district.

CLC, in partnership with Native American Rights Fund and the Law Offices of Bryan Sells, have filed a friend of the court brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in the Callais case. The brief represents MHA Nation’s interest in the correct application of racial gerrymandering and Section 2 case law and corrects the mischaracterizations of North Dakota’s redistricting cases made by other parties.

For more information on Native Nations’ legal challenges to North Dakota’s 2021 State Legislative Map, visit the Walen case page and Turtle Mountain and Spirit Lake Nation case page.

Though the legal questions at issue in the Louisiana and North Dakota cases are different, CLC’s amicus brief in the Louisiana case reminds the Court that states must be allowed to consider the VRA while redistricting to ensure all voters live under fair maps and all voters’ voices are heard.  

At the end of its 2024 term, the Supreme Court set the case for re-argument in October 2025. CLC submitted a second amicus brief explaining that Section 2 is a critically important civil rights statute and is an exercise of Congress's enforcement powers under the 14th and 15th Amendments, not a violation of them. The brief explains that, because of the high evidentiary standard required in Section 2 cases, the statute is always responding to actual current discrimination—and that race unfortunately still plays an excessive role in the electoral process, demonstrating why the protections of Section 2 are necessary.