On September 24, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, serving in the Trump administration’s Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of striking down race-based congressional districts drawn under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA).
The case, Louisiana v. Callais, stems from Louisiana’s redistricting efforts to comply with VRA requirements. Louisiana argues that such “race-based redistricting” is unconstitutional because it “violates fundamental equal protection principles.”
“Race-based redistricting is fundamentally contrary to our Constitution,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, a Republican, and other state attorneys wrote.
Dhillon, alongside Solicitor General John Sauer, contended that such districts—where race is the predominant factor in drawing boundaries—violate the U.S. Constitution, Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, as they prioritize skin color over traditional redistricting criteria like compactness, contiguity, and community interests.
Race-based Voting Rights Act Districts (based on skin color) have been historically drawn to favor Democrats.
Dhillon’s position aligns with longstanding conservative critiques of the VRA’s use in “majority-minority” districts, arguing that these maps amount to unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.
In her briefing and oral arguments, she emphasized that while the VRA was a landmark civil rights achievement in 1965, its modern application forces states to draw lines based on race, which the Supreme Court has scrutinized. The DOJ’s amicus brief in the case asserted a “strong basis in evidence” for challenging these districts, building on lower court rulings like the Fifth Circuit’s 2023 decision rejecting “coalition districts” (where multiple minority groups are combined to form a majority).
Dhillon urged the Court to rule that Section 2 cannot constitutionally require race-based districting, aligning with the DOJ’s push for “colorblind” governance. This stance builds on precedents like Wisconsin Legislature v. Wisconsin Elections Commission (2022), which limited the role of race in redistricting.
If SCOTUS rules in favor of the DOJ’s position—effectively abolishing or severely limiting race-based districts under the VRA—it could trigger widespread redistricting, adversely affecting Democrat-leaning areas. These Democrat-favored, racially drawn House districts, often created to ensure “minority” representation, have historically favored Dems due to higher minority voter turnout and preferences in urban and Southern states.
This one court decision could solidify Republican majorities in the House for many years as race-neutral maps would dilute minority voting in sprawling suburban or rural areas, potentially leading to significant long-term GOP gains.
Analysts estimate Democrats could lose 20-25 House seats in the 2026 and 2028 elections and beyond, particularly in states like Louisiana, Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, where recent VRA-mandated maps boosted Democrats.
A decision is expected by mid-2026. Given the Court’s conservative majority and the DOJ’s push, it could reshape electoral maps for the 2026 mid-term elections.
Bill Bruch
Bill Bruch is the WA State GOP Election Integrity Committee Chairman (5th year), WAGOP Executive Board Member (5th Year), Skagit County GOP Chairman (9th year), Citizen Journalist, Olympic Conference 2021 Activist of the Year Award Winner, Business Owner, 2020 WA State House Representative Candidate, Former Council Member, and WA State 2016 and 2024 RNC National Convention Delegate.
