“When the Supreme Court hears oral argument tomorrow in Louisiana v. Callais, it will confront two strains of precedent that contradict each other. On the one hand, a string of voting rights decisions starting with Thornburg v. Gingles (1986) interpreted Section Two of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in a way that compelled states to consider race in the drawing of legislative districts, on the theory that that would ensure the opportunity for minority voters to elect their preferred candidates. But of course, the overarching rule that has emerged in the Court’s constitutional jurisprudence is that drawing distinctions based on race is presumptively unconstitutional and subject to strict scrutiny.”
Read More HERE.