Watch All Shows Victor Davis Hanson Tony Kinnett Daily Signal Signal Sitdown

Watch All Shows Victor Davis Hanson Tony Kinnett Daily Signal Signal Sitdown

Home - Legal News - The Supreme Court’s Redistricting Ruling Sent Shockwaves Far Beyond One State—and Democrats Know It.

The Supreme Court’s Redistricting Ruling Sent Shockwaves Far Beyond One State—and Democrats Know It.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of video analysis by The Daily Signal’s Senior National Security and Legal Analyst Mehek Cooke. 

Louisiana v. Callais is the test case, but the real fight is in the Southern House map. This is why the Supreme Court ruling matters far beyond one state, one district, and one congressional map. This was not a technical redistricting case. This is actually the beginning of a national fight over whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act can continue to be used as a legal crowbar to force race-based districts that often produce Democratic seats. The left wants to frame this as the Supreme Court gutting voting rights—that is furthest from the truth, and that’s not what happened. The court said something much more basic.

The Voting Rights Act protects access to the ballot. It does not give politicians on either side a blank check to sort Americans by race or political advantage. That is why this ruling is so politically explosive, especially for Democrats, because they spent years using the redistricting playbook that was simple: identify racial disparity, demand a race-based district, call it civil rights, and lock in the political benefit. And the Supreme Court just made that playbook much harder to run.

In Louisiana v. Callais, the court actually held the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district. Because the Voting Rights Act did not require that map. Louisiana could not use compliance with the Voting Rights Act as a compelling interest to justify race-based line drawing. The results are clear: the map was unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. And that actually matters because the control of the House may come down to five to 10 seats. And every district line, every court ruling, and every map is going to matter for this midterm and beyond.

And Democrats know this. This is exactly why they’re not fighting to persuade voters. They were actually trying to change the battlefield before voters even show up to vote. They go to court, they demand a mid-decade map change, they push racial formulas, and they call it representation when it helps them win power.

But, hey, when Republicans draw maps for partisan advantage, Democrats call that a death to democracy. That is hypocrisy. Democrats do not hate gerrymandering. They hate gerrymandering when it doesn’t benefit them. They do not hate courts intervening in elections. They only hate courts that do not deliver Democratic outcomes.

That’s exactly why they’re having a meltdown over the Supreme Court decision. And they don’t hate changing the rules. They only hate it when Republicans learn how to play by the rules that Democrats created—and win. And this ruling exposes all of it. So the real question is: What happens........

© The Daily Signal