Supreme Court Deals Further Blow to Voting Rights Act

Supreme Court

live

Deportation Protections Arguments

April 29, 2026, 10:55 a.m. ET

Major Decisions

‘Shadow Docket’ Origins

Birthright Citizenship

‘Conversion Therapy’ Ruling

Tariffs Struck Down

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

Supported by

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Supreme Court Deals Further Blow to Voting Rights Act

The court struck down Louisiana’s voting map as an illegal racial gerrymander in a move that could make it harder for lawmakers to create majority-minority voting districts.

Listen

· 6:48 min

Share full article

By

Abbie VanSickle

Reporting from Washington

April 29, 2026,

10:48 a.m. ET

See more of our coverage in your search results.

Encuentra más de nuestra cobertura en los resultados de búsqueda.

Add The New York Times on Google

Agrega The New York Times en Google

The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down Louisiana’s voting map, finding that lawmakers had illegally used race when drawing up a new majority-minority district.

The decision was 6-to-3, split along ideological lines. The conservative majority asserted that the

opinion

was a limited ruling that preserved a central tenet of the Voting Rights Act, but the court’s liberal wing, in dissent, argued that the justices had taken the final step to dismantle the landmark civil rights law.

In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that the court had kept intact the Voting Rights Act but that Louisiana lawmakers had violated the Constitution with “an unconstitutional gerrymander” by aiming to create a new district with a majority of Black voters.

Justice Alito explained that

Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, countered that the practical effect of the decision would be to make it nearly impossible to use race when drawing up voting maps, writing that “the court’s decision will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity.”

Justice Kagan read her dissent from the bench, a rare move that often signals a justice’s strong displeasure with a decision.

It is unclear how the decision will impact the midterm elections amid the nationwide redistricting battle that has spiraled already into multiple states.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and

log into

your Times account, or

subscribe

for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?

Log in

.

Want all of The Times?

Subscribe

.

Related Content

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT