Florida court to consider whether new US House map violates state ban on partisan gerrymandering

A Florida court will hear arguments Friday on whether the state's new U.S. House map, signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis, violates a state ban on partisan gerrymandering. Lawsuits filed by voters seek to block the map's use in the upcoming midterm elections, arguing it unfairly benefits Republicans. The new districts, approved by the Republican-controlled legislature in April, could help the GOP gain up to four additional seats in Florida, where they already hold 20 of the 28 House seats. This legal challenge comes as Republicans nationwide are pursuing redistricting efforts to bolster their House majority.

Virginia Democrats have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate a congressional map they approved, which was designed to increase their party's representation in the upcoming midterm elections. This map was previously thrown out by the Virginia Supreme Court in a four-to-three decision. The state's highest court ruled that Democratic lawmakers did not follow proper procedures when approving the ballot measure that reconfigured the districts for partisan advantage. Democrats argue that the state court's decision infringes upon voters' rights and cite a previous Supreme Court ruling cautioning state courts against overstepping legislative authority in federal election matters. This case represents an unusual mid-decade redistricting dispute, with control of a closely divided Congress potentially at stake.

Louisiana senators are considering a new U.S. House map after the Supreme Court struck down their previous map for illegally using race to gerrymander a majority-Black district. The proposed plan would eliminate this district, potentially allowing Republicans to gain an additional seat in the upcoming midterm elections. This redistricting effort in Louisiana is part of a broader trend in Southern states, encouraged by President Trump, to redraw congressional maps to Republican advantage. South Carolina is also facing pressure to redistrict ahead of the midterms. While Republicans anticipate gaining seats, the actual outcomes remain uncertain due to ongoing litigation and voter decisions.

Louisiana's state senate has passed a bill to eliminate one of its two majority-Black congressional districts, shifting the state's congressional map to potentially favor Republicans with a 5-1 majority. This action follows a Supreme Court decision that weakened the Voting Rights Act. The proposed map, similar to one used in 2022, would reshape District 6, currently represented by a Democrat, into a more Republican-leaning district. District 2 would remain a majority-Black, Democratic-leaning district. Governor Jeff Landry previously suspended ongoing House primary elections to accommodate this redistricting effort. The bill now moves to the state house for approval by June 1st.

Following the Supreme Court's decision weakening Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, several Southern states are rapidly redrawing congressional maps. This effort aims to eliminate Democratic-held districts and dilute the voting power of Black communities. Tennessee has already enacted a new map that splits a majority-Black city, while Louisiana is poised to remove a district represented by a Black Democrat. Alabama is using a previously contested map, and South Carolina's governor may call a special session to target a prominent Black Democrat's district. This aggressive redistricting, occurring even after primaries have begun in some states, is seen as a significant threat to Black representation in the South.

Stacey Abrams, former Georgia gubernatorial candidate, has strongly criticized Republican-led states' redistricting efforts, calling them "evil incarnate" in a new Guardian podcast. She argues these actions intentionally suppress minority voting power and are a form of "cheating" to dismantle democratic competition. Abrams highlighted that this is not merely a partisan struggle but an attempt by authoritarians to undermine democratic systems. Her comments come after the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act, leading states like Tennessee to eliminate majority-Black congressional districts. Abrams emphasized the need to fight these redistricting drives in courts and at the ballot box, stating that democratic institutions are being used as tools of authoritarianism.

Louisiana's governor has paused the state's US House primary elections, originally scheduled for Thursday, following a US Supreme Court ruling. The ruling struck down a congressional map that created a second majority-Black district, asserting that such districts can only be challenged if there's evidence of racist motivation in their drawing. This decision, which critics argue violates the constitution and creates confusion, comes amid a national redistricting battle. The pause means voters will not select candidates for the state's six US House districts, impacting the upcoming general elections and potentially influencing control of Congress. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Voting Rights Act is central to this ongoing dispute over electoral representation.

Democrats have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a Virginia ruling that invalidated a ballot measure creating new congressional districts. The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the amendment, passed by voters last month, arguing it was improperly placed on the ballot after early voting began. Democrats contend that an election doesn't occur until Election Day, even if early voting is underway. This appeal is part of ongoing redistricting battles nationwide, amplified by recent Supreme Court decisions. The Democrats' request is considered a long shot, as the Supreme Court typically defers to state courts' interpretations of their own constitutions.

Virginia's Supreme Court has invalidated a redistricting plan approved by the state's Democratic-led legislature, handing a victory to Republicans. The court ruled that the legislature violated procedural requirements when placing a constitutional amendment on the ballot to authorize mid-decade redistricting. This amendment, narrowly approved by voters on April 21, would have allowed for a new electoral map designed to shift four Republican-held US congressional seats to Democrats. The court's decision renders the referendum results void, citing irreparable damage to the integrity of the vote. This ruling comes ahead of the November midterm elections and could strengthen Republican hopes of maintaining their majority in the US House of Representatives.

Tennessee's Republican-controlled legislature and governor have approved a new congressional map ahead of the November midterms. This redistricting effort carves up the state's only Black majority district, which is currently held by a Democrat and centers on Memphis. This action follows a nationwide trend of states redrawing congressional maps mid-decade, often to favor the dominant party. The approval comes after the US Supreme Court weakened restrictions of the Voting Rights Act, making it harder to prove intentional disenfranchisement of minority voters. This ruling has accelerated redistricting efforts across several states, including Texas, Missouri, California, Utah, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia.

Tennessee's Republican-controlled legislature has passed new congressional maps that eliminate the state's only Democratic and Black-majority district. The ninth congressional district, which encompasses Memphis, has been divided into three sections, each containing roughly one-third of the city's Black voters, ensuring all nine of Tennessee's congressional districts are now Republican-leaning. This redistricting occurred shortly after the Supreme Court weakened provisions of the Voting Rights Act. Republicans stated the redraw aims to reflect the state's conservative values, while Democrats criticized the move as an attempt to rig elections and reminiscent of Jim Crow practices. The legislative session was marked by protests and the removal of audience members.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that Louisiana's congressional map, which created two Black-majority districts, is unconstitutional. In a 6-3 decision, the court's conservative majority stated that proving racist intent is now required to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act's Section 2. This ruling, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, overturns a lower court's decision that found the map likely violated the act by diluting minority voting power. The map was initially drawn by Louisiana's Republican legislature after the 2020 census, which resulted in only one Black-majority district despite Black residents comprising a third of the state's population. Critics argue this decision could weaken minority voting power nationally.

The US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, has limited the use of race in drawing electoral maps, impacting states like Louisiana. The ruling, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, stated that previous interpretations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act sometimes compelled states to engage in race-based discrimination, which the Constitution prohibits. The majority opinion found that to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act, litigants must now demonstrate intentional map-drawing to diminish minority voting opportunities. This decision makes it more challenging to challenge maps for diluting minority voting power. The ruling could significantly alter the political landscape, particularly in the American South, amidst ongoing partisan battles over redistricting.

The US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling, has significantly restricted the use of race in drawing electoral districts. The decision, made on Wednesday, struck down a Louisiana map that created a second majority-black congressional district, deeming it an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. While the core of the 1965 Voting Rights Act remains, its application has been narrowed. This ruling could lead to nationwide changes in congressional maps and potentially benefit Republican candidates in upcoming elections. Civil rights advocates view this as a setback for voting rights protections.

The US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, has significantly weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a key provision preventing racial discrimination in voting. The ruling, based on Louisiana's congressional map, determined that states are not required to create majority-minority districts, a practice long used to ensure fair representation for minority voters. This decision, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, is seen as a major setback for civil rights and could diminish the voting power of minority groups. Lawmakers have expressed concern, stating the ruling sends the nation backward. This action is viewed as the culmination of efforts by Justices Roberts and Alito to curtail civil rights legislation.

A recent Supreme Court ruling in *Callais v. Landry* has significantly weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which previously prohibited practices that disenfranchise minority voters. The decision requires litigants to prove explicit racial motivation in redistricting, rather than focusing on the discriminatory effect of districting plans. This shift is expected to allow Republican majorities, particularly in the South, to more easily engage in gerrymandering that marginalizes Black political power. While the Voting Rights Act has historically led to increased racial diversity in Congress, the ruling may undermine these gains. The article notes that current congressional demographics show a strong correlation between non-white voters and the Democratic party, suggesting that partisan gerrymandering can now be used as a cover for racial gerrymandering.

The US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, has effectively weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a key provision preventing racial discrimination in voting. The ruling, stemming from a case involving Louisiana's congressional map, allows states to draw redistricting plans that may dilute the voting power of minority groups. The majority opinion stated that race should not be a primary factor in redistricting, deeming the state's attempt to satisfy a previous ruling unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Dissenting justices argued this decision demolishes the Voting Rights Act, making Section 2 largely ineffective and allowing for the systematic dilution of minority voting strength. This decision follows previous rulings that have dismantled other significant parts of the landmark civil rights law.

Following a Supreme Court ruling that weakened a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, President Donald Trump announced that Tennessee will redraw its congressional district maps. This ruling removes race-related restrictions on redistricting, prompting Republicans to advocate for map revisions in several states. Trump stated he spoke with Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, who reportedly agreed to address perceived flaws in the state's congressional maps. This move is expected to create an additional Republican-leaning district in Tennessee, potentially benefiting the party's efforts to maintain control of the US House of Representatives in the upcoming midterm elections. Other states, including Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, California, Utah, and Virginia, have also been involved in redistricting efforts.

The US Supreme Court reinstated a Republican-favored Texas electoral map on April 27, 2026, which could shift up to five House seats from Democrats to Republicans. This decision, supported by President Donald Trump and approved by the Republican-led Texas legislature, overturns a lower court ruling that had blocked the map due to concerns of racial discrimination. The ruling, decided by a 6-3 ideological split, is expected to bolster Republican representation in the 2026 midterm elections. Civil rights advocates criticized the decision, asserting it diminishes the political power of racial minorities.