On April 29, 2026, in Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court invalidated a Louisiana congressional map, holding that racial considerations cannot predominate in the drawing of electoral districts. The ruling narrowed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by requiring plaintiffs to show intentional discrimination, not just discriminatory effects. In this episode, we explore the Court’s 6-3 decision and what it means for the future of the Voting Rights Act with two leading election law scholars: Edward Foley of The Ohio State University and Michael Morley of Florida State University College of Law. Julie Silverbrook, chief content and learning officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates.

Resources

Edward Foley, “The Supreme Court’s indefensible evisceration of the Voting Rights Act,” SCOTUSblog, May 5, 2026
Michael Morley, “Voting Rights Case Sets Stage for 2050’s Multiracial Democracy,” Bloomberg Law, May 6, 2026
Louisiana v. Callais (2026)
Allen v. Milligan (2023)
Robinson v. Ardoin (2022)
Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021)
Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
Thornburg v. Gingles (1986)
Voting Rights Act (1965)
National Constitution Center, “The Supreme Court’s Callais decision sets new framework for racial gerrymandering” (April 30, 2026)
National Constitution Center, Voting Rights Classroom Resources
National Constitution Center, Elections and Voting in the Constitution (Constitution 101 Curriculum)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr
Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate
Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen
Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Support our important work

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate