Louisiana Republicans rush to eliminate majority-Black congressional seat following Supreme Court ruling
Louisiana lawmakers passed a new congressional map Friday designed to help Republicans pick up a seat while eliminating one of the state's two majority-Black House districts, both of which are represented by Democrats.
Objective Facts
Louisiana's Republican lawmakers raced to eliminate one of two majority-Black congressional seats in the state after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the current map unconstitutional in a sweeping ruling. The Supreme Court responded on April 30 by striking it down as an illegal racial gerrymander. The proposed map redraws Democratic U.S. Rep. Cleo Fields' district, clustering it around predominantly white communities in the Baton Rouge area and southern Louisiana. The state Senate passed the map on Friday afternoon with a vote of 28–10, sending the legislation to Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, who is expected to sign it. Legislators opted to eliminate only one of the majority-Black districts held by Democrats, fearing that going further could make other districts held by Republican incumbents like House Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise too competitive.
Left-Leaning Perspective
Capital B News reported that "Louisiana Republicans on Friday approved a new congressional map that erodes Black voting power in the state — eliminating a majority-Black district established in 2024 that gave residents there an opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice," with the move coming "one month after the U.S. Supreme Court found that the lines of the dismantled district — Cleo Fields, a Black Democrat, held the seat — rely too much on race." Eric Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, condemned the map, stating "For the better part of a century, Black Louisianans were barred not just from the ballot box but from the halls of Congress. And even now, Louisiana has only had four Black members of Congress since Reconstruction, and that was largely due to the creation of court-mandated maps that protected Black voters." Holder said the new map "halves Black representation in the state" and accused the Supreme Court's conservative majority of failing to protect the rights of Black voters, while "Black elected officials and voting-rights groups said they are preparing legal challenges alleging the revised map unlawfully dilutes minority voting strength." During debate, Democratic state Rep. Kyle Green Jr. argued "We are being asked to take one of two minority opportunity districts in this state — where Black Louisianians are nearly one-third of the population — and to reduce that minority opportunity representation to a single seat out of six, from 33% of the population to 16% of the representation members. That's not a map. That's a math problem with the moral answer, and the answer is no." Rep. Cleo Fields told CNN "There's not a single African American ever elected to Congress from Louisiana from a majority-white district," adding "People unfortunately vote on racial lines … and the courts in the past have recognized that." Democratic state Sen. Royce Duplessis said during floor debate "From the beginning of the process, I said we're building a house on a broken foundation — now it feels more like quicksand." Left-leaning coverage emphasizes the map's racial consequences despite Republican claims of partisanship-only motivation. Coverage frames the elimination of the majority-Black district as a rollback of voting rights protections and notes the historical context of Black representation in Louisiana. The left downplays Republican arguments about partisan versus racial redistricting, pointing to the statistical correlation between race and party affiliation in the South.
Right-Leaning Perspective
Fox News reported that Republican gains come "from successes in Texas and North Carolina, and new maps in Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama." Republican state Sen. Jay Morris said the map "meets all the traditional redistricting criteria; it's not racially gerrymandered" and "I feel like it's going to be very defensible." Republican state Rep. Beau Beaullieu stated "We focused on the Democrat numbers, not the racial numbers when drawing" and "We focused in this case on partisanship, which is what Callais said, and I mentioned in my intro, is clearly permissible." Republican state Sen. Jay Morris "repeatedly insisted that party affiliation, not race, drove district boundaries," saying "I purposely put more Democrats into District 2 to make the remaining districts better performing for Republicans." Morris said he "told the map demographers to avoid including any data on race or including those statistics in information shared with lawmakers before the vote." Morris defended the map saying "These maps are drawn to maximize Republican advantage for the incumbent Republicans that we have in Congress at the present time." Gov. Landry framed the redistricting as alignment with law, writing "The best way to end race-based discrimination is to stop making decisions based on race." Right-leaning outlets and Republican leaders frame the map as a partisan redistricting effort made legal by the Callais Supreme Court decision, which clarified that partisan gerrymandering is permissible while racial gerrymandering is not. The right emphasizes that Republicans focused on party affiliation rather than race and omits sustained focus on the practical racial consequences of the map or the constraints it imposes on Black voter influence.
Deep Dive
Louisiana created a second majority-Black congressional district in 2024 following a 2022 lawsuit arguing that state lawmakers had illegally diluted Black voting power in a state where Black voters account for roughly one third of the population. A court agreed, and Louisiana legislators passed the current map, which was then challenged and struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that "Section 2 of the VRA only protects against political lines drawn with the intent of discriminating on the basis of race," weakening the landmark voting law. Republican bill sponsor Jay Morris said his goal in drawing the map was to "disregard race and instead focus on party," noting that "while racial gerrymandering remains illegal, partisan redistricting is legal," with his map designed to "maximize Republican advantage for the incumbent Republicans that we have in Congress." The central analytical tension is whether the partisan and racial effects are meaningfully separable in Louisiana's political context, where voting patterns are highly correlated with race. As Louisiana Illuminator noted, "race and party are deeply intertwined in Louisiana. Black voters in Louisiana overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates, while white voters disproportionately support Republicans. A map that reduces Democratic voting strength can also reduce Black political influence." The right frames this as a legal distinction—partisanship is permissible under Callais while race is not—while the left argues that the practical effect cannot be disentangled from the racial impact. What remains unresolved is whether courts will accept Louisiana's map or whether voting rights groups will successfully challenge it. Black elected officials and voting-rights groups are preparing legal challenges alleging the revised map unlawfully dilutes minority voting strength. Additionally, the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court's decision criticized the legislature's map for leaving a majority-Black district in place, potentially creating a scenario where the map faces legal attack from both directions. The outcome will have significant implications for how the Callais decision is applied in other Southern states and whether partisan redistricting with foreseeable racial consequences remains legally permissible.