Just days before a pivotal Election Day, the battle over who gets to draw the lines that shape American democracy has reached a fever pitch in both Louisiana and Virginia. The future of congressional representation—and, some argue, the very integrity of the vote—is now in the hands of courts, legislatures, and the highest levels of government, with national implications hanging in the balance.
This week, the Supreme Court is set to decide Louisiana v. Callais, a case that could redefine the Voting Rights Act’s reach and the fate of minority representation in Congress. At the heart of the matter is Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map, which created two majority African American districts out of six, closely mirroring the state’s Black population. According to the National Urban League, this new map was designed to correct a long history of disenfranchisement and ensure fair representation, as mandated by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1964.
But not everyone sees it that way. A group of non-African-American voters claims the new districts discriminate against them, arguing that the map’s design unfairly prioritizes race in a way that violates their own rights. Civil rights advocates counter that the map is a lawful remedy for a legacy of discrimination—a legacy that includes poll taxes, literacy tests, and the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson decision, which once enshrined segregation in Louisiana.
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as explained by the National Urban League, allows for legal challenges when a state’s voting systems show a pattern of discrimination—be it in the form of racially polarized voting, exclusion from candidate selection, or the impact of historic inequalities in education, employment, and health. Louisiana, with its notorious "Cancer Alley"—a 150-mile corridor of oil refineries and chemical plants through predominantly African American communities—has long been a flashpoint for both environmental and electoral justice.
Marc H. Morial, President and CEO of the National Urban League, invoked President Lyndon B. Johnson’s words at the signing of the Voting Rights Act: “Millions of Americans are denied the right to vote because of their color. This law will ensure them the right to vote. The wrong is one which no American, in his heart, can justify. The right is one which no American, true to our principles, can deny.” Morial warns that striking down Section 2 would not just impact Louisiana. “Striking down Section 2 won’t stop at disenfranchisement in Louisiana. In the last two years, North Carolina, Missouri, and Texas have been directed to redraw their state maps to increase Republican seats in the House of Representatives,” he wrote, highlighting the national stakes.
The political context is equally charged. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (LA-04), who represents a Louisiana district, has overseen a Congress that, according to the National Urban League, passed a spending bill shifting wealth from the poor to the wealthy, slashing Medicaid and SNAP benefits, and rolling back environmental protections—moves that disproportionately affect Black and working-class Louisianans. For many, the fight over redistricting is inseparable from broader struggles over economic and racial justice.
Meanwhile, in Virginia, a surprise special legislative session has thrown the state’s own redistricting process into turmoil. On October 27, just a week before voters head to the polls, House Democrats—led by Majority Leader Charniele Herring—pushed through a procedural resolution expanding the session’s scope to include a proposed constitutional amendment. This amendment would allow lawmakers to redraw congressional districts mid-decade, a move Democrats say is necessary to counteract Republican efforts in states like Texas, North Carolina, and Missouri to do the same.
“This was an important vote for us to take this week in order for us to have that option,” said Del. Cia Price, chair of the House Privileges and Elections Committee, as reported by Virginia Mercury. “If we were not to take this action right now, then we would be pulling an option from the voters.” Price argued that the move is a defensive measure, prompted by what Democrats see as a coordinated national campaign—encouraged by former President Donald Trump—to reengineer congressional maps and tip the balance of power in the U.S. House.
Republicans, however, blasted the maneuver as a constitutional overreach and a partisan ambush. House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore accused Democrats of sidelining both the minority and the public, saying, “There’s a lot of issues that we need to talk about to the voters of Virginia, but obviously the ruling party had other plans.” Del. Lee Ware warned that the move defied centuries of precedent, calling it “an attempt to grab power by erasing the voter’s voice.”
Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, the Republican nominee for governor, went further, accusing Democrats of seeking to dismantle the independent redistricting commission established in 2020. “They want to dismantle the very independent redistricting commission that Virginia was voting for in a bipartisan majority,” she said, linking the move to Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger and citing large donations from Eric Holder’s National Democratic Redistricting Committee to both Spanberger and Virginia House Democrats. Governor Glenn Youngkin also joined the fray, accusing Spanberger of hypocrisy for allegedly changing her position on mid-decade redistricting after receiving the donations.
Democrats insist the amendment is not a mandate to redraw districts, but simply an option to respond to "extraordinary circumstances." Del. Rodney Willett emphasized, “Maybe the most important point to make here is what the resolution is not going to do, which is to abolish the commission that was created through the earlier constitutional amendment. This is to create, again, not a mandate, but an option, in the interim, in between those decennial redistrictings to do something when there’s an extraordinary circumstance.”
Virginia’s five Republican members of Congress held a joint news conference condemning the Democratic move, warning it undermines voter confidence and fairness. Legal experts and Republican leaders argue that Democrats have missed the legal deadline for advancing a constitutional amendment and predict the matter will end up in court. “They’re wasting our time,” said Republican Party of Virginia Chair Mark Peake. “It’s going to be overturned as soon as it gets to court.”
The broader stakes are clear: as the New York Times reported, Virginia Democrats’ rush to act is driven by fears that Republican-controlled states could redraw congressional boundaries before 2026, potentially costing Democrats several seats. The Supreme Court’s pending decision in Louisiana v. Callais only heightens the urgency, as states across the country brace for a new era of redistricting battles.
For now, both Louisiana and Virginia stand at the crossroads of history and democracy, their next moves watched closely by the nation. As lawmakers, advocates, and voters grapple with questions of fairness, representation, and power, the outcome of these fights will echo far beyond state lines—shaping the rules of American democracy for years to come.