WASHINGTON — Republicans see a clear win in Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision striking down Louisiana’s congressional maps and that victory could keep them in control of the House after November’s election.
The Supreme Court, in a major 6-3 decision, struck down Louisiana’s majority-black House district and weakened the Voting Rights Act, giving Republicans a chance to rewrite the congressional maps, particularly in Southern states.
As a result, Republican-led states could eliminate black and Latino electoral districts. And some strategists are arguing it’s time for the party to get aggressive to keep the House in control and protect President Trump’s agenda.
Some black lawmakers are already worried they’ll be a target in this year’s election.
“This is huge,” Brad Parscale, Trump’s former campaign manager, observed.
“Right now, this only applies to Louisiana, but states can challenge their congressional maps and, with precedent, pick up Republican seats. If states are aggressive, we could see a healthy majority in the House perpetually.”
While the court didn’t explicitly throw out Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act – the provision that prohibits voting discrimination on the basis of race – it did weaken it and made it much more difficult for states, especially in the South, to draw majority-minority districts favoring black voters.
Follow The Post’s live coverage of President Trump and national politics for the latest news and analysis
Liberals lashed out at the Supreme Court, with some re-upping calls to pack the court with more justices.
Black lawmakers questioned the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and demanded court reforms, with one comparing the decision to Jim Crow laws.
“Not since Jim Crow have we seen this level of systematic disenfranchisement of black voters,” said Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Yvette Clark. “With the stroke of a pen, this rogue, unaccountable Court has effectively signed the death certificate of the Voting Rights Act, undoing decades of black progress.”
She said black lawmakers wanted to see new legislation passed to protect their districts and called for Supreme Court justices to be term-limited.
The caucus supports “any measure necessary to bring a legislative solution to the floor to protect black voters around the country,” and that includes “term limits for justices to help restore independence, neutrality, and legitimacy to the Court.”
The repercussions could be far-reaching, although campaign operatives are still studying the decision to figure out how many House seats will be affected this year. The consensus, however, is that the decision gives the GOP the advantage.
“Expect at least one state to try to redraw the map,” a Republican operative told The Post. “Democrats are freaking out.”
The decision comes as there is a nationwide redistricting war going on between Republicans and Democrats. Both sides are redrawing House districts between the censuses in an effort to win in November, a move sparked by President Trump’s push to keep the House in his party’s control.
“It could be open season now,” CEIR Executive Director David Becker told reporters, citing his concern the ruling could cause “chaos” in future elections.
Alabama Rep. Terri Sewell (D) said she expects to be a target of Wednesday’s ruling.
She told reporters on Capitol Hill the court’s decision is “a devastating blow” to American democracy and a “gift” for the president.
“It’s a gift to Donald Trump and his voter suppression scheme,” she said, adding she “absolutely” expects her state to try and redraw her district this year.
A federal court required Alabama’s current map to be in use through the 2030 cycle but Republicans can use Wednesday’s ruling to challenge that.
Several election analysts note the court didn’t go as far as it could have in striking down the Civil Rights era law.
“Quick read is that only affects handful of districts right now,” noted Sam Shirazi, adding the ruling was “not a green light to totally get rid of all” minority-majority districts.
And Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who heads the GOP campaign arm, said the ruling “restores fairness.”
“Today’s decision is a victory for the Constitution and the principle that every American citizen is equal under the law,” he said. “This ruling restores fairness, strengthens confidence in our elections, and ensures every voter is treated equally.”
But one Democratic House operative argued the ruling will allow Republicans to “rig” House elections.
“This decision by a partisan Supreme Court gives Republicans the green light to rig House elections and silence the voices of Americans across the country,” House Majority Pact President Mike Smith said.
Still the gray area will allow more challenges to such districts, putting black lawmakers in danger, whether that happens this election year or in future ones.
Louisiana will have to go back to the drawing board.
Rep. Cleo Fields (D-La.), whose district was invalidated by the court’s ruling, urged the state to redo its map quickly.
“It is what it is,” he said. “The final court has spoken. Louisiana now must make its decision. I think the wise decision is if they’re gonna redraw lines, they need to redraw them for the next election.”
Florida is also in the process of redrawing its congressional map. And, in Tennessee, Republican Marsha Blackburn, who is running for governor, called on the state legislature to reconvene and redraw the state’s districts: “I urge our state legislature to reconvene to redistrict another Republican seat in Memphis,” she said.
But Georgia’s primary is set for next month and it would be hard for the state to redraw that map given the ballots are set. However, Democratic Reps. Sanford Bishop in Georgia and Shomari Figures in Alabama are likely future targets for having their districts redrawn.
South Carolina is a likely candidate to redo its map under this ruling but its filing deadlines have passed and its primaries are set, meaning it’s highly unlikely a change would happen this year.
And Mississippi would be a great candidate for a new map but they’ve already had their primary for this election cycle.
In the end, this Supreme Court’s decision will likely result in a slew of cases to determine the fallout on a state level.
The “decision seems to suggest more litigation to figure out precisely what it means,” said Crystal Ball’s Kyle Klondik.
“For 2026, we’ll see how states react on a case by case basis.”
