Supreme Court lowers bar for racial gerrymanders
The court rejected a claim that South Carolina's congressional map excluded Black voters


What happened
The Supreme Court voted 6-3 Thursday to keep in place a South Carolina congressional map that a lower court had ruled an impermissible racial gerrymander. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court's conservatives, said the challengers had failed to prove the state's Republican legislature had removed a swath of Black voters from the Charleston-area swing district due to race instead of allowable "partisan preferences."
Who said what
"The challengers introduced more than enough evidence of racial gerrymandering," Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a blunt dissent for the court's three liberals. Alito's majority opinion betrays a "lack of familiarity with the events and evidence central to this case," she said, and creates "special rules to specifically disadvantage suits to remedy race based-redistricting."
The court's conservative majority "effectively substituted their judgment about what actually happened for that of the district court," said University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck to CNN. The Supreme Court is only supposed to do that when "lower court findings are clearly erroneous," Rick Hasen said at Election Law Blog. The "bottom line practical" impact of the ruling is that Alito has "once again come up with a legal framework that makes it easier for Republican states to engage in redistricting to help white Republicans maximize their political power."
What next?
Alito's opinion "did not entirely foreclose the possibility that civil rights groups might eventually prevail" using a different legal theory, Politico said. But "the chances of any changes in the map this year seem vanishingly remote."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Rafi Schwartz has worked as a politics writer at The Week since 2022, where he covers elections, Congress and the White House. He was previously a contributing writer with Mic focusing largely on politics, a senior writer with Splinter News, a staff writer for Fusion's news lab, and the managing editor of Heeb Magazine, a Jewish life and culture publication. Rafi's work has appeared in Rolling Stone, GOOD and The Forward, among others.
-
Ukraine: Trump's mixed messages
Feature Trump reverses a Pentagon freeze on Patriot missiles to Ukraine as Russia ramps up air attacks
-
Diddy: An abuser who escaped justice?
Feature The jury cleared Sean Combs of major charges but found him guilty of lesser offenses
-
Death from above: Drones upend rules of war in Ukraine
Feature The world's militaries are paying close attention to drone use in the Russia-Ukraine war
-
How will Trump's megabill affect you?
Today's Big Question Republicans have passed the 'big, beautiful bill' through Congress
-
How successful would Elon Musk's third party be?
Today's Big Question Musk has vowed to start a third party after falling out with Trump
-
Supreme Court lets states ax Planned Parenthood funds
Speed Read The court ruled that Planned Parenthood cannot sue South Carolina over the state's effort to deny it funding
-
Court allows National Guard in LA as Dodgers repel feds
Speed Read The team said they 'denied entry' to ICE agents seeking to enter their stadium
-
ICE arrests NYC comptroller at courthouse
Speed Read Brad Lander was held for about four hours before being released
-
Trump ramps up Iran threats, demands 'surrender'
Speed Read Trump met with his top aides in the Situation Room on Tuesday
-
ABA sues Trump over 'law firm intimidation policy'
Speed Read Trump has 'used the vast powers of the executive branch to coerce lawyers,' the lawsuit said
-
Judge orders Trump's NIH grant cuts reversed
Speed Read Trump had attempted to slash more than $1 billion in research grants