Live Coverage: Louisiana v. Callais SCOTUS Decision

The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an unprecedented and unlawful effort to invade the privacy of millions of American voters and threaten their right to vote. It has demanded that every state and the District of Columbia turn over their entire voter database, including Social Security Numbers, political party affiliation, and voter participation history. And at least a dozen states have complied, submitting their voters’ information for federal review. But the Department of Justice has no authority to dictate when a voter registration should be cancelled, and we are suing to stop the federal government’s overreach and ensure that voters’ information remains secure and free from unlawful interference.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court today struck down Louisiana’s congressional map and issued a ruling that eviscerates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and opens the door for states to enact discriminatory maps with impunity. As a result, Black voters and other voters of color could face the elimination of districts across the country that have provided fair representation. Section 2 has long served as the primary nationwide protection against discriminatory voting systems following the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which eliminated the Act’s preclearance system. Today’s ruling effectively eliminates that remaining enforcement mechanism in all but name. With a severely narrowed Section 2, voters challenging racially discriminatory maps and voting laws will face higher legal barriers and fewer statutory protections. The decision affects not only congressional redistricting but challenges to state legislative and local election systems across the country. “This decision is a profound betrayal of the legacy of the civil rights movement. By gutting Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the Court has weakened the primary legal tool that voters of color rely on to challenge discriminatory maps and election systems. In practical terms, this means that even where racial discrimination in voting is clear and ongoing, communities will be left without the most significant weapon they have to stop states from drawing districts that dilute their political power. Representation for Black, Latino, Native, and other voters of color will increasingly depend on the goodwill of legislatures rather than enforceable law, allowing discriminatory systems to persist unchecked and making meaningful political representation far harder to achieve,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. “The Supreme Court has reversed decades of progress toward a multiracial democracy in the name of partisan politics. The 6-3 majority decision is the height of hypocrisy and exemplifies the Court’s waning credibility on matters of civil rights and racial justice. The ruling is devastating for Black Louisiana voters and for fair representation for all voters of color,” said Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel of the Legal Defense Fund. “It also undermines the legitimacy of institutions that rely on fair maps to represent the American people. This is a day of shame for the Supreme Court. The majority’s claim that it is preserving our most sacred voting protections is disingenuous. It has rendered key voting protections that have served this country for than 60 years null and void. Section 2 was rightly named the crown jewel of the Civil Rights Movement by earlier compositions of this Court. Today, however, the Roberts Court has allowed discrimination to run rampant as long as state mapmakers cite even the most tenuous justification. This is a setback for our country and our constitution which grants Congress the authority to address the scourge of racial discrimination in voting. We will demand new legislation to protect voters and continue to fight to defend and advance civil rights for all people and to protect our democracy as our institutions continue to fail us. This fight will continue in the courts, in statehouses, in the streets and most importantly at the ballot box until the promise of our multiracial democracy is realized. What the Court did not do and cannot do is take away our fundamental right to vote, and it is incumbent on every American to exercise that right now more than ever in service of our democracy.” The plaintiffs in Robinson v. Ardoin are a group of Louisiana voters, including individual Black voters and civic organizations, who challenged the state’s congressional map under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Louisiana, and the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), along with pro bono counsel. The congressional map at issue in the Callais case was enacted by the Louisiana State Legislature in response to the Robinson litigation. However, during the second oral arguments in the case, the Robinson appellants were the only parties continuing to defend the congressional map with two majority-Black districts after state officials declined to do so. “Today’s loss of our current voting districts in no way means that Louisiana’s congressional map should not reflect the people living and voting in Louisiana,” said the Robinson appellants. “Black voters, not just in Louisiana but across the country, cannot be ignored, and our political power cannot be denied forever. This fight was never just about one map but about the continuously silenced Black voices that just want a fair shot at participation in the political process. We deserve our vote to matter as much as any other. We are constitutionally owed the opportunity to elect candidates who represent us and our communities. And we will not stop in our march, nor spare any resource in our fight to make sure that the sun will eventually rise on an America with free and fair elections for all of its people. "Today’s decision is a significant setback for our multiracial democracy. By gutting Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the Court has undermined one of the last remaining tools that protected voters from racial discrimination in redistricting,” said Alanah Odoms, executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana. “This cruel decision is a devastating blow to Black and brown Louisiana voters, who have fought for decades to see their voices fairly represented. By stripping away Section 2 protections, the court leaves communities here vulnerable to maps that dilute their political power and undermine the hard-won promise of a multiracial democracy. But on the ground in Louisiana, we remain committed to protecting every voter’s right to participate and ensuring that our communities are not silenced." The ruling has immediate consequences for communities currently engaged in redistricting litigation and for voters seeking relief from discriminatory practices such as vote dilution, restrictive registration requirements, and changes to election administration that disproportionately burden communities of color. While today’s decision sharply limits federal voting rights protections, advocacy and enforcement efforts will continue through legislative action, state constitutional claims, and other available legal avenues.

SALT LAKE CITY — A coalition of voting rights groups filed a motion to dismiss the Department of Justice’s complaint in U.S. v. Henderson. The groups released the following statement: Utah’s election system is safe, secure, and efficient. The Department of Justice does not have a legal right to obtain the state’s unredacted voter list. This list contains Utahns’ private information, including information protected under state and federal law. Unlawfully disclosing this information threatens voter privacy and the removal of eligible voters from voter rolls. We are determined to act as a firewall against the Trump administration’s aggressive effort to gain access to the sensitive data of millions of Utah voters. There is no lawful or legitimate reason to hand over sensitive voter information to federal agencies to interfere with state election administration. Copy of the motion here.

Voting rights groups should be allowed to intervene as defendants in Louisiana's suit against the U.S. Election Assistance Commission through which the state seeks to require additional proof of citizenship, argued the League of Women Voters of Louisiana and others in a motion to intervene in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.