Supreme Court Hearing Arguments Today in Critical Voting Rights Act Case

Today, the United States Supreme Court is hearing arguments in Louisiana v. Callais on race-based redistricting and the Voting Rights Act, which will impact the entire country. This is a challenge to the congressional map that Louisiana adopted in 2024, which may reshape the Voting Rights Act.

SCOTUS Blog explains:

In a brief filed on Aug. 27, Louisiana no longer defended the 2024 map. It told the justices that race-based redistricting – even if done to comply with Section 2 – is unconstitutional. Quoting the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, which struck down the use of race in admissions at colleges and universities, the state declared that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.” The 14th Amendment, the state contended, “commands that the government ‘may never use race as a stereotype or negative.’ Yet race-based redistricting rests on an invidious stereotype: that all minorities, by virtue of their membership in their racial class, think alike and share the same interests and voting preferences.” (read more here)

In California’s effort to influence the midterm elections, Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta announced their intentions to blow up California’s independent redistricting commission, effectively tampering with the state’s electoral maps mid-decade… because TRUMP.

As the Globe reported: Gov. Newsom is conflating his desires to win the midterm elections with actual federal law and Texas’ working to bring its districts in line with federal law and court decisions.

In July, Texas Governor Greg Abbott added redistricting to the 2025 state agenda because the U.S. Department of Justice raised legal concerns over the constitutionality of four districts in the state over where district lines were redrawn in 2021 following the heavily manipulated 2020 Census.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent a letter to Gov. Abbott and AG Paxton, identifying four Texas congressional districts as “unconstitutional racially based” gerrymanders. These so-called coalition districts (combining minority groups like Blacks and Hispanics) were found not protected under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act based on the 2024 5th Circuit ruling in Petteway v. Galveston County, Hans Von Spakovsky explains.

“When Texas drew its coalition districts in 2021, it impermissibly used race and ethnicity as the predominant factor in drawing the boundary lines. That makes those four districts unconstitutional because they violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, the ‘one person, one vote’ standard—meaning they must be redrawn.”

Democrats are in a panic about the census because they have been counting illegal immigrants, which has inflated their political power, unfairly and illegally, with ill-gotten congressional seats (some estimate by as many as 12 seats). The U.S. Census should never count illegal immigrants for purposes of congressional apportionment, but that’s exactly what Democrats did in 2020.

As Charlie Kirk posted on X in July:

What Democrats are really afraid of: 1) Redoing the Census and properly counting state populations 2) Removing illegals from the count. If it’s war he wants, it’s war he’ll get.

Newsom is playing a stupid game of legal chicken with the President, and Newsom will lose.

For additional information about California’s Proposition 50, Gov. Newsom’s effort to redistrict the state mid-decade, read this detailed X post by Constitutional and Election Law Attorney Mark Meuser:

Gavin Newsom says voting Yes on Prop 50 “Gives Voters the Power.” Don’t be fooled. We don’t live in a democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic. There is a big difference.

In a democracy, the majority always wins. It’s two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Whoever has 50% + 1 controls everything.

A Constitutional Republic puts limits on the majority to protect the rights of the minority. The Founders designed our system to prevent fleeting majorities from crushing individual liberty.

Prop 50 is Gavin’s attempt to tear down the guardrails. He should not be allowed to rewrite the rules whenever he has the votes. Gavin is destroying the constitutional protections that keep our republic free.

Gavin isn’t trying to “protect democracy.” He’s trying to create a system where any politician who grabs a slim majority can strip away the rights of those who dissent.

Californians have said twice that they want independent redistricting. Newsom wants to ignore the people’s will and hand power back to partisan insiders.

If Prop 50 passes, the rights of Californians will depend not on the Constitution, but on the whims of whoever holds power at the moment. That’s not liberty.

That’s instability — and it’s exactly what our system was designed to prevent. That’s not freedom. That’s tyranny of the majority. That’s not giving “voters the power.”

Prop 50 is about giving Gavin the power to rig the system and silence opposition.

Don’t let Newsom Gavin-mander our state. Our Constitution was written to stop exactly this kind of power grab.

Prop 50 is dangerous because it replaces the rule of law with the rule of politicians.

Say NO to Prop 50. Protect our Constitutional Republic. Protect your rights. Stop Gavin’s power grab.

Gavin Newsom says voting Yes on Prop 50 “Gives Voters the Power.” Don’t be fooled. We don’t live in a democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic. There is a big difference.

In a democracy, the majority always wins. It’s two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.… pic.twitter.com/vmNpO1kKCF

— Mark Meuser (@MarkMeuser) October 14, 2025

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon posted this video from the steps of the Supreme Court after the hearing:

On the steps of SCOTUS after listening to oral argument in the important Voting Rights Act case, Louisiana v. Callais! Hash did a phenomenal job articulating @TheJusticeDept’s position (which Jesus and I co-wrote) to a very hot bench. Oral advocacy at its finest! pic.twitter.com/fMrh6Srdxf

— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) October 15, 2025

We will update this article as more information about the SCOTUS case as available.