Louisiana’s latest attempt at redrawing its congressional map just got slapped down by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals as an unconstitutional mess.
According to Fox News, in a nutshell, the court ruled that the map, crafted by the state’s Republican-majority legislature, illegally dilutes Black voting strength, violating key protections under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Let’s rewind to 2022, when Louisiana’s legislature first rolled out a map after the 2020 census with just one majority-Black district. A federal court promptly blocked it for weakening Black voting power, ordering a redraw by January 2024. Hardly a shining moment for fair representation, if you ask me.
Fast forward to the revised map, dubbed S.B. 8, which stretched a second majority-Black district over 250 miles from Shreveport to Baton Rouge. Critics called it “sinuous and jagged,” and non-Black plaintiffs argued it leaned too heavily on race, breaching equal protection principles. Sounds like a cartographic puzzle gone wrong.
The Fifth Circuit didn’t buy Louisiana’s defense that times have changed enough to ditch race-conscious fixes. Their ruling bluntly stated there’s “no legal basis” for ignoring historical voting inequities. That’s a polite way of saying the state’s argument didn’t hold water.
All three judges on the panel agreed the map “packs” Black voters into a few districts while “cracking” others apart, shredding their ability to form effective voting blocs. If that’s not a textbook gerrymander, what is? It’s a move that seems less about fairness and more about political chess.
While the Fifth Circuit’s decision hands a temporary win to the ACLU and other plaintiffs, one judge issued a stay before it could kick in—though it’s largely irrelevant since the Supreme Court already paused things earlier this year. Talk about judicial ping-pong. The real showdown looms ahead.
Speaking of the high court, they tackled Louisiana v. Callais with oral arguments in March 2025, zeroing in on whether race was misused in district lines. In June, they decided more debate was needed, scheduling additional arguments for the fall term. Clearly, this map’s fate is far from settled.
Just this August, Supreme Court justices ordered both sides to submit extra briefs by mid-September, digging into whether a second majority-Black district violates constitutional amendments. It’s a legal tug-of-war with no easy answers. One wonders if clarity will ever emerge from this thicket.
Zoom out, and Louisiana’s drama is just one piece of a nationwide redistricting brawl as the 2026 midterms loom. These fights carry high stakes, with the GOP worried about losing House control in a potential referendum on the White House. It’s politics at its rawest.
Take Texas, where Democratic legislators fled the state to stall Gov. Greg Abbott’s push for a map adding five Republican-leaning districts. Then there’s California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a Democrat-friendly map. Both moves scream partisan maneuvering over principle.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul didn’t mince words, declaring, “We are at war,” while hosting Texas Democrats who bolted to her state. War? That’s a bit dramatic for map-drawing, but it shows how these battles are less about voters and more about power grabs.
Back to Louisiana, where the state has fiddled with its map twice since the 2020 census, only to hit legal walls each time. The Fifth Circuit’s ruling echoes the lower court’s stance that this violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It’s a reminder that fairness in voting isn’t just a slogan—it’s a legal mandate.
Yet, with the Supreme Court’s final word still pending, Louisiana’s districts remain in limbo. Will the justices uphold protections against racial gerrymandering, or will they side with the state’s claim that such remedies are outdated? It’s a coin toss with massive implications.
For now, conservatives might grumble at another judicial roadblock, but let’s be honest—maps should serve the people, not just one party’s playbook. If Louisiana’s design truly undermines fair representation, it deserves to be scrapped, no matter who drew it. That’s not woke; it’s just right.
