— A headline about this extremely ankle-forward designer shoe. Get a tetanus shot before trying this trend.
Voting
The Court Redraws the Map — and the Rules
What's going on: Yesterday, the Supreme Court effectively took a sledgehammer to a key part of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and raised the bar for what counts as a “racially discriminatory” congressional map. The case looked at a dispute over Louisiana’s 2024 voting map, which added a second majority-Black district after a push from Black voters — who make up about a third of the state’s population. But a group (comprised of self-described “non-African Americans”) claimed this was racial gerrymandering that violated the Constitution, and soon the issue climbed to the highest court.
What this means for voting maps: The conservative justices ruled the VRA only prevents maps that intentionally limit minority voters’ power, but that doesn’t mean states can’t use race to create maps that level the playing field for those voters. For those of us who didn’t go to law school, this decision just made it much harder to prove discriminatory racial gerrymandering in court — especially because states can just argue their maps are driven by politics, not race (yes, it’s perfectly legal to tweak maps for partisan gain). For the minority, Justice Elena Kagan warned that the ruling could undo decades of progress.
What this means at the ballot box: Expect state lawmakers in the South to head back to the (map) drawing board. Republicans could eventually score an additional 19 House seats, though it’s unclear how many can redraw their lines before the midterms. But The Washington Post reports Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) has wasted no time and plans to suspend next month’s state primaries to rearrange the map. The justices’ decision built on earlier rulings that already weakened the VRA. And this could open the door to challenges to state-level voting rights protections. Critics — including former President Barack Obama, Martin Luther King III, and state lawmakers — condemned the justices’ decision.
