WASHINGTON — Late Wednesday, the League of Women Voters and partner organizations filed an amicus brief in the US Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais in support of fair representation for Black voters in Louisiana. The League is represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is also a co-amicus. The League is joined on this brief by Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), National Urban League, and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
After assigning the case to be argued again last term, the Court ordered the parties to consider a new question: whether creating a majority-Black district under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) violated the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
“This case is about our collective vision for American democracy and whether we will be a country that lives our values of freedom and justice for all,” said Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters. “The Voting Rights Act was a commitment this country made to right the wrongs of the past and move toward a multiracial democracy. If the Court rules that remedial districts under Section 2 are unconstitutional, it will ensure that states could annihilate Black representation at will. Such a ruling would allow states to crush voters of color by making it impossible for them to have fair representation. This is an utter perversion of the purpose and text of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.”
The League previously filed an amicus brief in this case last term, arguing that states should be encouraged to draw districts that comply with Section 2 of the VRA as Louisiana did in this case.
Rob Weiner, director of the Voting Rights Project at the Lawyers’ Committee and the principal author of the brief, stated that, “To prohibit consideration of race in remedying Section 2 violations would undo decades of caselaw under the VRA, effectively neutralize the statute, and subvert the 15th Amendment, which sought equal rights for all races in the nation’s governance.” Weiner also expressed concern that “prohibiting race-conscious remedies would be profoundly destabilizing, unleashing legislatures around the country to seek partisan advantage by restricting equal opportunity for voters of color. Such a result," Weiner said, “would devalue core American principles and put democratic institutions at risk.”
Currently, Section 2 of the VRA requires lawmakers to draw maps that do not dilute the political power of voters of color and prohibits voting practices that deprive voters of color the right to vote based on race. The plaintiffs in Louisiana v. Callais now request the Court to eliminate the protections provided by Section 2, using a twisted interpretation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments — which address equal protection under the law and prohibition of racial voting discrimination — to make it impossible to enforce the protections of Section 2 in redistricting, claiming remedial districts ensuring equitable representation for voters of color are unconstitutional.
“Protecting the right to vote is as compelling an interest as any government of the people and by the people could have,” said Patrick Stegemoeller, supervising attorney at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF). “Louisiana’s campaign to brazenly dilute the voting power of its communities of color cannot be sanctioned by allowing the state to merely shrug off its failure to rectify its past and present condition of racial discrimination in voting. The court must reaffirm that states not only have a right, but a constitutional obligation to remedy maps and voting methods that prove discriminatory.”
"This move is more than a legal maneuver; it is a direct assault on Black political power," said Marc H. Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League. "My beloved home state of Louisiana has regrettably decided to step back into the dark ages via a callous effort to overturn the Voting Rights Act. Black Louisianans make up nearly one-third of the state's population, and only after extensive legal pressure and the leveraging of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act did the state adopt a second majority-Black district for the 2024 elections. The dismantling of the Voting Rights Act will pave the way for fewer majority-minority districts not only in Louisiana but across the nation, decimating representation in Congress, statehouses, and local governments. Protecting voting rights and fair maps is foundational to American democracy."
"This case before the Court is a transparent attempt to dilute the voting power of the most influential voting bloc in America: Black women," said Alison Gill, director of nominations and democracy at the National Women's Law Center (NWLC). "When their vote is diluted, it paves the way for other attacks on women, including on our reproductive rights, workplace protections, and basic need programs. We strongly urge the Supreme Court to uphold our democratic institutions and reject efforts that would drag us back to the 1960s by allowing states to suppress a person's right to vote based on their race."
The question before the Court means that states across the country could see fair representation diminished or outright annihilated if the majority rules for the plaintiffs. Leagues from several states are quoted below detailing how this case will affect fair voting representation in their state:
“In 2024, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act defended Black Alabamians’ right to equitable representation in the United States Congress. Amidst the ongoing efforts of Alabama to undermine Black Alabamians’ voting rights, the protection of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act remains paramount." | Kim Bailey, president, League of Women Voters of Alabama
“California is one of the most ethnically and linguistically diverse states in the nation. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is a crucial tool in protecting meaningful voting access and fair representation for California’s communities of color. It’s not just about fair maps — the law also safeguards against discriminatory voting practices, ballot access barriers, and election procedures that deny equal political opportunity. Section 2 is vital to ensuring that every vote counts and every voice is heard in California’s diverse democracy.” | Gloria Chun Hoo, president, League of Women Voters of California
“The League of Voters of Louisiana has been working with partners to pursue fair congressional maps in our state for the last four years. For the first time in decades, communities with shared interests were able to elect a candidate of their choice in 2024 and to enjoy real representation in Congress. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, like racial discrimination and disempowerment in Louisiana, is not an antiquated relic of the past — it has real effects that persist today on which voters deserve to have a voice. Section 2 is intended to secure effective representation to address real community needs — transportation, education, recreation, economic development — that are ongoing and have persisted to the present day. Effective representation in Congress that is responsive to community needs, interests, and aspirations can secure federal resources to address these problems for everyone’s benefit. Redistricting must be about fairness, justice, and effective representation of all communities!” | M. Christian Green, president, League of Voters of Louisiana
“The Voting Rights Act is a crucial tool in protecting a meaningful vote and fair representation at all levels of government for communities of color. Section 2 of the VRA is essential in protecting the voting rights of the Black voters in Mississippi, who constitute thirty-seven percent of our voting age population, consistently the highest percent in the United States. Mississippi has a long, well-documented history of racial discrimination, and Section 2 of the VRA has been and will continue to be vital in building a state government that is responsive to the entire electorate.” | Ruth O’Dell, president, League of Women Voters of Mississippi
"For the past 60 years, the Voting Rights Act has been an essential tool for protecting the voting rights of vulnerable Tennessee communities. The League of Women Voters of Tennessee has relied on Section 2 of the VRA through the court system to address redistricting inequities in the past and to ensure that every voice is heard in our political process. It must continue as the critical safeguard in our state to give marginalized and underrepresented Tennessee citizens an opportunity to be an active part of our shared democracy." | Debby Gould, president, League of Women Voters of Tennessee
"This case is about more than district lines — it is about whether our democracy will live up to its promise of fair representation for all. For Texans, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act has long been a vital safeguard against racial vote dilution, and it remains one of the strongest tools we have to ensure that voters of color can make their voices heard. The Court now has an opportunity to make clear that protecting against racial discrimination in voting is not optional — it is fundamental to the future of our multiracial democracy." | Joyce LeBombard, president, League of Women Voters of Texas
“No one can argue that any part of the Voting Rights Act is no longer necessary, given the constant voter suppression attempts since it was enacted. We must protect the right to vote for all citizens, and Section 2 of the VRA is a vital tool to do so.” | Joan Porte, president, League of Women Voters of Virginia
“Because those of us who live in the nation’s capital know what it is to be disenfranchised because of where we live and our racially diverse community, we strongly support upholding the Voting Rights Act’s protections against racial discrimination in voting. The Court must ensure that every vote counts and every voice is heard in our political process.” | Anne Stauffer and Barbara Zia, co-presidents, League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia
###