WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court today ruled in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Samuel Alito in Louisiana v. Callais that the Voting Rights Act, properly interpreted, does not require states to violate the Constitution by drawing race-based districts.  

Zack Smith, senior legal fellow and manager of The Heritage Foundation’s Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, applauded the decision in the following statement:

“Justice Alito’s opinion confirms what many of us already knew: Courts’ misinterpretations of the Voting Rights Act that purported to require states to draw congressional districts based on race were wrong.

“The Court today corrected that misinterpretation and made clear that ‘Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act...was designed to enforce the Constitution—not collide with it.’ Sorting citizens by race is wrong. And it agreed that Louisiana’s congressional map, drawn to satisfy a lower court’s misguided interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, violates the Constitution.  

“Going forward, states that have drawn maps based on misguided interpretations of the Voting Rights Act from lower federal courts will likely have to revisit and redraw those maps.”

BACKGROUND:

Stopping the Unconstitutional Misuse of the Voting Rights Act: Louisiana v. Callais