• Redistricting

Louisiana v. Callais

  • Louisiana
  • Ongoing

The NRF is supporting a group of Black Louisiana voters as amici in the ongoing challenge to Louisiana’s Section 2-compliant congressional map drawn in response to successful litigation brought by the NRF. Following a district court’s preliminary injunction against Louisiana’s 2021 map in HB 1, on January 22, 2024, the legislature enacted SB 8, a map that includes two congressional districts in which Black voters have the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.

On January 31, 2024, a group of self-proclaimed “non-African American voters,” the “Callais Plaintiffs,” challenged SB 8, alleging it is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander in violation of the 14th and 15th Amendments and intentionally discriminates against “non-African American” voters. They argued that the legislators’ interest in drawing a map that includes a second Black-opportunity district indicates a disregard for traditional redistricting criteria, the establishment of a racial quota, leading to the discrimination of “non-African American voters.” The NRF-supported Galmon voters sought to intervene in the litigation to defend the VRA-compliant map, but the district court denied their ability to participate in the proceedings, but permitted their participation in any subsequent remedial proceedings.

On April 30, 2024, the court granted a preliminary injunction, concluding that CD-6, the new Black opportunity district drawn to comply with the VRA, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and enjoined the state from using SB 8. The U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay of the district court’s injunction upon an emergency request. On a subsequent merits appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, oral argument was held on March 25, 2025, on whether the district court erred in its judgment.

On June 27, 2025, on the last decision day of the term, the court announced that it would rehear new arguments during the fall term. On August 1, 2025, the court directed the parties to submit supplemental briefing on only one question: Whether the State’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The court heard a second oral argument on October 15, 2025, and a decision is expected to be issued at any time.

Case Documents