Share and Follow
The Supreme Court on Monday swiftly enacted its decision to nullify Louisiana’s congressional map, igniting a contentious exchange between conservative Justice Samuel Alito and liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in their dissenting opinions.
This directive accelerates the usual 32-day period before the justices officially remit a case to a lower court.
Some organizations have raised concerns about whether the lower court acted prematurely in the Louisiana case by moving quickly to allow state Republicans the chance to draft a new map ahead of this year’s election. Officially, the case remained under the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.
Justice Jackson, in her dissent, accused the majority of liberating themselves from “constraints.”
Justice Alito, with the backing of Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, issued a strong rebuttal to Jackson’s remarks.
“The dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered,” Alito wrote. “The dissent would require that the 2026 congressional elections in Louisiana be held under a map that has been held to be unconstitutional.”
No other justice publicly disclosed their vote.
The sparring comes after the court last week ruled Louisiana unconstitutionally added a second majority-Black district in a blockbuster 6-3 decision that weakened a central provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
The decision landed just as officials were sending out overseas ballots and getting ready to open early voting for the primary, throwing a potential wrench into the timeline.
The justices gave no guidance, however, on whether the state should redraw its map before this year’s midterms, although the high court has previously ruled that changes to elections should be avoided too close to the actual date of an election.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) delayed the primary so state Republicans could get to work on a new map. And the lower court said the state would have an opportunity to do so.
But the case technically remained at the Supreme Court, which has a 32-day default window following an opinion before a case is returned to the lower court.
The parties battled about what the justices should do.
The self-described “non-African American” voters who successfully challenged Louisiana’s map told the Supreme Court they should forego the normal waiting period before they release the case back to the lower court. That would ensure Louisiana could redraw its map without delay.
At the same time, the high court has been sensitive to encouraging changes close to an actual election. Louisiana’s primary is May 16; however, its congressional primaries have now been delayed.
The Supreme Court’s decision has come against the backdrop of a broader redistricting arms race across the country where Republican and Democratic states have looked to redraw different states’ congressional maps ahead of the midterms.
Louisiana Republicans are eager to redraw at least one of the Black-majority House districts, which would offer them the opportunity to gain an additional seat in Congress.