The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which bars racial gerrymandering, has sparked outrage among Democrats, but the ruling is the culmination of decades of jurisprudence. Chief Justice John Roberts, who has long argued against using race in government decisions, wrote in 2006 that “it is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” The court’s majority held that neither the Voting Rights Act nor the Constitution allows lawmakers to manipulate districts to guarantee the race of elected representatives.
A Colorblind Vision
Roberts has consistently opposed racial discrimination in any form, famously stating in 2007 that “the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” This philosophy underpins the court’s recent rulings, including last year’s unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, which ruled that whites face no extra burden in discrimination lawsuits. The Callais decision builds on that precedent, rejecting the use of racial criteria in redistricting.
Political Reactions
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) called the court itself “gerrymandered,” accusing it of rigging elections. Democratic leaders have vowed to reverse the ruling, with some calling for expanding the Supreme Court. However, the decision does not gut the Voting Rights Act; it simply holds that Section 2 of the act cannot be used to create districts that favor candidates based on race. Courts will still block districts designed to suppress minority voters, as seen in recent redistricting battles in Alabama and Tennessee.
Historical Context
Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Callais opinion, joined Roberts in rejecting the rationale of past rulings like Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), which upheld racial admissions criteria for diversity. In that case, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor set a 25-year expiration date on such preferences, a timeline the court has now effectively ended. The Biden administration has faced repeated court findings of unconstitutional racial discrimination in federal programs, further fueling the push for a colorblind legal framework.
Progress and Challenges
While the ruling marks a shift, racial discrimination persists. As Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Non-white voters are now a powerful force in American politics, and leaders like Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries—who called the court “illegitimate” after Callais—are poised for higher office. The decision is part of a broader trend, as the court has also struck down other unconstitutional laws, signaling a commitment to equal treatment under the law.
The Callais ruling does not eliminate the need to combat racism, but it moves the country closer to a system where race is no longer a factor in government decisions. As Roberts wrote, ending “this sordid business” is a goal worth pursuing.
