However, the decision could affect any changes to Congressional maps beyond the 2028 presidential election campaign, as the court has ruled that race cannot be used to justify district maps.
How the Supreme Court could affect the 2026 midterm elections
The Supreme Court has ruled that Texas can use a congressional map drawn to favor Republicans, and other states are now following suit.
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Louisiana’s latest congressional map was criticized for “watering down” the Voting Rights Act, but legal and political experts say it is unlikely to play a major role in the 2026 midterm elections.
The court ruled that Louisiana relied too heavily on race in drawing maps to determine House seats in 2022. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for a 6-3 majority, said the map was an “unconstitutional gerrymander” that violated the rights of non-Black voters who challenged it.
The decision was highly anticipated as it came amid the turmoil that saw the largest redistricting process since the 1880s during the customary decennial census. The remapping battle pitted Republicans and Democrats for control of the House, where Republicans narrowly lead. However, most states have already held primaries for 2026, so the high court’s decision is likely to have a major impact on the 2028 presidential election or 2031, after the next census.
Supreme Court: Opinions are sharply divided over racial discrimination
The Supreme Court previously ruled in 2019 that states can redraw maps for partisan interests, but not on racial grounds. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was intended to prevent mapmakers from weakening the voting power of racial minorities by crowding them into one district or spreading them across too many districts to exert influence.
Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that when crafting voting laws, lawmakers understand that discrimination rarely occurs in public, but is hidden “in technical rules, in fine print, in lines quietly drawn on maps.” He said the ruling could accelerate an “already relentless arms race” in redistricting where “politicians choose voters rather than the other way around.”
“The stakes go beyond a single map or a single election cycle,” Hasen wrote on his blog on Feb. 18. “Balanced minority representation in Congress is as important as the fundamental premise that voters should be able to hold their representatives accountable.”
Michael Dorff, a constitutional law professor at Cornell University, said the case reignited a decades-long debate about how to avoid discrimination against voters.
“What Alito and other conservatives are trying to say is that we condone politics, but we specifically don’t condone racial gerrymandering, because what you claim is a remedy for racial gerrymandering is itself racial gerrymandering,” Dorff told USA TODAY. “This is just a summary of the discussions we’ve been having about affirmative action over the last 50 years.”
Dorff said he was not aware of any other pending legal challenges to race-based congressional maps.
“No other district that I know of intentionally creates majority-minority districts,” he says.
Alito said the focus of the Voting Rights Act is to enforce Section 15’s prohibition on intentional racial discrimination.th Constitutional amendment.
The amendment, approved in 1870 after the Civil War, was intended to protect black people’s right to vote by prohibiting the denial of the right to vote “on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
Alito said that invoking the Voting Rights Act to “outlaw maps simply because they don’t provide enough majority-minority districts would create rights that the amendment does not protect.”
Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissent, saying the decision would allow states to systematically undermine the power of minority voters.
“Of course, the majority did not announce today’s event as such, and their opinion is modest, even antiseptic,” Kagan wrote. “But in reality, these ‘updates’ water down the law and do nothing to correct even the classic examples of vote dilution cited above.”
Critics of the ruling say it will “silence” minority voters.
The slow-motion effect did nothing to assuage criticism of the decision.
The lawsuit challenged Louisiana’s congressional map, which includes two majority-black districts out of six in a state where about one-third of the population is black. Non-black voters had argued that the lottery for seats was unconstitutional on racial grounds. Courts can allocate seats to favor one party or another, but generally not on racial grounds.
Former President Barack Obama said, “Today’s decision effectively guts a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act and gives state legislatures free rein to gerrymander districts to systematically dilute and weaken the voting power of racial minorities, so long as it is done under the guise of partisanship rather than blatant racial bias.”
NAACP President Derrick Johnson called the decision a “devastating blow” and a “licence for corrupt politicians to rig the entire system.”
Issue One, an advocacy group that tracks redistricting across the country, said changing the map for 2026 could be difficult because many states have already held primaries and legal challenges before the general election pose a significant hurdle. But the map could change after the 2028 election.
“Today’s Supreme Court decision makes it easier for politicians to silence the voices of voters of color and redraw maps that protect them rather than reflect their voters’ choices,” said Michael McNulty, No. 1 Policy Director. “When incumbents can handpick voters, the voice of the people is weakened.”
President Trump begins redistricting battle for control of House of Representatives
Redistricting became a wide-ranging and costly battle in 2026 as President Donald Trump encouraged states led by his fellow Republicans to redraw their maps to maintain a House majority. The House of Representatives has 217 Republicans, 212 Democrats, and one independent member who previously belonged to the Republican Party. The five vacancies were filled by three Democrats and two Republicans.
President Trump said he loves hearing about court decisions and looks forward to reading them. The president said he would continue to encourage Republican-led states to redraw their maps.
“We will,” President Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “So, it depends. Some states don’t require redrawing, and some states do.”
Nationwide redistricting battle could end in a draw
All redistricting races could end in ties this year.
Texas began its sweep by drawing maps to create five more Republican-majority seats in its 38-member delegation. California responded by adding five Democratic seats to its 52-member delegation.
Virginia voters just approved redistricting that would add four Democratic seats to the state’s 11 members. And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis called a special session with the goal of adding four Republican seats to the 28-member delegation.
In Florida, the seats considered most susceptible to gerrymandering remain unchanged in the proposed map.
In Mississippi, Gov. Tate Reeves last week called for a special legislative session three weeks after the Supreme Court’s ruling. However, the new map could apply beyond 2028.
“This is a decision that could (and I think should) forever change the way electoral maps are drawn,” Reeves said on social media before the verdict was handed down.
Missouri is facing a legal battle over a referendum to redraw one of its key electoral districts before considering changes based on a Supreme Court ruling.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall called the decision a “watershed moment” in preventing states from using race to draw districts. Alabama’s primary election is May 19th, and the runoff election is June 16th.
“We will apply this ruling to Alabama’s redistricting efforts and act as quickly as possible to ensure that our congressional maps reflect the will of the people and not the racial quotas prohibited by the Constitution,” Marshall said.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) called on the state Legislature to redraw the map to eliminate Memphis, the only Democratic seat among the nine delegates.
As primaries approach, new maps may not be published this year.
Two states have primaries coming up. If states change their maps between primary and general elections, they could be subject to legal challenges.
Georgia’s primary voting began on April 27, so there are few redistricting options. In Louisiana, primary voting is May 16th, and early voting begins May 2nd.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said the Supreme Court had reached a “clear result” in the case.
“We’ll see what impact that has,” Prime Minister Boris Johnson told reporters. “As you know, we have a primary election coming up in about two weeks, so we’ll see if the Legislature deems it appropriate to draw new maps.”
