Federal Panel Throws Out Louisiana’s Redrawn Map With Majority-Black Districts

Sign at a runoff election for Louisiana governor at a polling station at Quitman High School in Quitman, La., on Nov. 16, 2019. Matt Sullivan/Getty Images

A panel of federal judges has thrown out Louisiana’s recently-drawn congressional map that had created a second majority-black district in the state, likely sending the case to the Supreme Court.

In a 2-1 vote on April 30, the three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court in Monroe, Louisiana sided with voters who opposed the new map, finding that it violated the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

They further agreed that race had played a “predominate role” in the redistricting of the congressional districts in the state and that the new district created by the map, known as District 6, is an “impermissible racial gerrymander.”

“The State first made the decision to create a majority-Black district and, only then, did political considerations factor into the State’s creation of District 6,” District Judges Robert R. Summerhays and David C. Joseph, both appointees of former President Donald Trump, wrote in the court’s majority opinion.

“The predominate role of race in the State’s decisions is reflected in the statements of legislative decision-makers, the division of cities and parishes along racial lines, the unusual shape of the district, and the evidence that the contours of the district were drawn to absorb sufficient numbers of Black-majority neighborhoods to achieve the goal of a functioning majority-Black district,” the court continued.

“Having considered the testimony and evidence at trial, the arguments of counsel, and the applicable law, we conclude that District 6 of SB8 violates the Equal Protection Clause,” the panel wrote.

Map Barred for Future Elections

“Accordingly, the State is enjoined from using SB8 in any future elections,” they concluded.

The judges also set a date of May 6 to discuss the remedial stage of the trial.

The new congressional map was drafted after a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that the previous map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because it had one majority-black district out of six, while black residents made up roughly a third of the state’s population.

Democrats and civil rights groups sued over the earlier map, alleging that it diluted the voting power of black residents.

The new map was signed into law by Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, in January, just days after it was approved in a special legislative session.

Under the latest version, Louisiana’s 6th District, which is held by Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), was reshaped to give it a black population of around 56 percent, making it the state’s second majority-black district.

Elsewhere, the state’s 2nd District, which was its only majority-black district for multiple years, retained its majority-black status with a black population of around 53 percent.

However, the newer map endangered the reelection chances for Republicans in Congress, who already hold a slim majority.

‘Explicit, Racial Segregation of Voters’

The new map was subsequently challenged by voters who claimed that the state had engaged in the “explicit, racial segregation of voters and intentional discrimination against voters based on race.”

“From start to finish the State’s purpose was clear: segregate voters based entirely on their races and create two majority-African American voting districts and four majority nonAfrican American districts, without regard for any traditional redistricting criteria,” the plaintiffs, who described themselves in the lawsuit as “non-African American voters,” said.

They further alleged the new map violated their 14th and 15th Amendment rights.

Still, not every judge on the panel sided with the plaintiffs.

In a dissent, Circuit Court Judge Carl E. Stewart, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote that he did not find the plaintiffs in the lawsuit had met their burden of establishing that the new map amounts to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

“The totality of the record demonstrates that the Louisiana Legislature weighed various political concerns—including protecting of particular incumbents—alongside race, with no factor predominating over the other,” the judge wrote, adding that the map should have been allowed to stand.

The latest ruling means the case is now likely to end up before the Supreme Court.

In a statement on the social media platform X, state Attorney General Liz Murrill vowed to challenge the ruling.

“We will of course be seeking Supreme Court review,” Ms. Murrill said.

“The jurisprudence and litigation involving redistricting has made it impossible to not have federal judges drawing maps. It’s not right and they need to fix it.”

Tom Ozimek contributed to this report.