Opinion | The Voting Rights Act Changed America. Now, It Can Change.

"In Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court ruled that even states like Louisiana, where about a third of the residents are Black, could create legislative districts that would most likely elect only white officials, as long as the denial of Black representation involved political considerations, not deliberate racial discrimination. But, the six conservative justices said, it was racially discriminatory to intentionally create majority-Black legislative districts designed to elect Black officials."

"As Justice Elena Kagan bemoaned in her dissent, a plaintiff objecting to district maps that kept Black voters from electing representatives of their choice would need to show that the maps were motivated by a discriminatory purpose, something that is well-nigh impossible. She thought the court need concern itself only with the racial effects, not racial purpose, as it had from 1986 until last week's ruling."

"To many, this justifies focusing on effect, not intention, since the way party support tracks with race means that racism can always be disguised as partisanship."

The Supreme Court's recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais represents a significant weakening of voting rights protections established by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The ruling permits states to create legislative districts that would likely elect only white officials, provided the denial of Black representation is framed as political rather than racial discrimination. Conversely, the Court deemed it racially discriminatory to intentionally create majority-Black districts designed to elect Black representatives. This creates a paradox where protecting Black electoral representation is classified as discrimination while preventing it is permitted. The decision shifts focus from racial effects to discriminatory intent, making it nearly impossible for plaintiffs to challenge discriminatory maps since racism can be disguised as partisanship, particularly given that Black voters predominantly support Democratic candidates.

Read at www.nytimes.com