What is Louisiana v. Callais and how will it affect voting in Louisiana?

Louisiana’s new congressional map, which was drawn to add a second majority-Black district after a federal court said Black voters were being shortchanged, is now under fire at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case, Louisiana v. Callais, pits the Voting Rights Act against the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, which could reshape how districts are drawn across the South.

The opposing principles of this case are: protecting minority voters’ power under the Voting Rights Act and limiting race-based districting under the 14th and 15th Amendments.

The 2022 case of Robinson v. Landry ruled that Louisiana’s previous map likely diluted Black voting strength, prompting lawmakers to create a second majority-Black district.

Then, a group of white voters, led by plaintiff Callais, sued, arguing the state’s map relied too heavily on race. A three-judge panel agreed, and now Louisiana is appealing the Supreme Court to overturn that decision.

Robinson v. Landry found that the congressional map in place at the time likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Section 2 states that voting procedures in the United States cannot discrimination on the basis of race, color or membership to a language of a minority group.

At the time, Louisiana had only one majority-Black district (District 2), even though roughly one-third of the state’s population is Black. In 2020, the U.S. Census Bureau found that Louisiana’s population was 4.6 million. White residents accounted for 2.6 million and Black or African American residents accounted for 1.5 million

State Representative Terry Landry Jr. of District 67, which encompasses areas of Baton Rouge, says the math alone shows unfairness in the old map:

“You look at having six congressional districts within our state, and one-third of that state is African American. The math is simple, we have six, you divide that by three, you get two. If you want equal representation and reflection of what the state looks like, that would be representation. As an African American, I do not feel that having six districts and having only one of them being representative of a minority is fair representation.”

In response to the Robinson ruling, Louisiana created a new map, forming a second majority-Black district. District 6 in this new map starts in Shreveport, follows the Red River down through Alexandria, and ends in both Baton Rouge and the northern portion of Lafayette.

However, after this map was put into place, is when a group of “non-Black voters,” identified as Callais, sued Governor Jeff Landry in January 2024, claiming that the new map violated the 14th and 15th Amendments of the Constitution.

A three-judge Federal District Court panel found that District 6 of the new map did indeed violate the Equal Protection Clause, prompting an appeal from Louisiana to the Supreme Court for a reversal.

The Equal Protection Clause, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, says lawmakers cannot consider race predominately over other factors when redistricting without compelling reason.

The new case, Louisiana v. Callais, met for oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court on Oct. 15, 2025. A decision is expected sometime before June 2026, the two majority-Black districts map will remain in place until the Court’s ruling.

The question is: Did Louisiana violate the 14th and 15th Amendments of the Constitution?

Furthermore, which takes precedence? The violation of the Equal Protection Clause or the violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act?

Callais is using the EPC to justify their opposition to the two districts, and Louisiana is using the VRA, along with the fact that they have been compelled by the federal court, to justify the inclusion of the second district.

Landry Jr. finds it shocking that these two pieces of law have been pitted against each other.

“The Equal Protection Clause and the Voting Rights Act are now conflicting,” he said. “I’m in fear the Supreme Court will make a bad ruling, which will impact not only myself, but my children, and possibly my children’s children.”

Dr. William Davie, an ED Bliss Award winner and holder of the University of Louisiana at Lafayette Regents chair of communication, feels that the very fact that the Supreme Court has taken this case, means the VRA, as it is now, is in danger.

“I think that there’s reason for concern…historically, our state has been identified as racially prejudiced, and that goes back to the old Confederacy and the slavocracy that predominated…the plantation class in an earlier era. The Supreme Court rarely takes a case for rehearing, and they are taking this case for rehearing. They want to add another legal question because they want to act against something. I have a strong inclination that the reason they did this extraordinary move of asking for a relitigation on this particular case, is they’re about to do something to the Voting Rights Act.”

This case goes far beyond one congressional map. A ruling for Callais could weaken Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the key protection against racial vote dilution, and affect how voters are represented across the South.

More than a million Louisianans could see their political voice change depending on what the Supreme Court decides in time, and the ruling will likely guide future redistricting fights in other states.

State Rep. Terry Landry Jr. says Louisianans can’t afford to stay silent.

“We have to scream from the mountaintops that this is not right. We deserve fair representation,” he said. “We’re not asking anyone to give us anything we haven’t earned or deserved. Fair representation is fair representation across the board.”