Recent SCOTUS decisions threaten to uproot communities’ voting power

The race to push forward new redistricting maps will diminish the voting power of diverse communities. 

It is hard to overstate how radically the Supreme Court’s Louisiana v. Callais ruling has already diminished the political power of Black voters in the United States. The decision has essentially set a new precedent for redistricting, firmly establishing that there is “no compelling interest” in using race to create a congressional map that increases Black voter representation.

The decision has further weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark 1965 law that prevented electoral discrimination based on race and has served as the foundation for numerous lawsuits protecting the voting rights of diverse communities. The Supreme Court’s decision has already “uprooted” the political power of voters in Black and brown communities and will likely have long-term consequences that could dramatically affect political outcomes well into the future. 

Historically, the Voting Rights Act was designed to protect the right to vote and provide opportunities for representation to people of color, who have faced and continue to face greater challenges being elected to office. A central issue in the Callais decision is a practice called “packing,” in which districts with overwhelming Black or brown majorities are redrawn in ways that ultimately minimize those voters’ influence across the remaining districts in the jurisdiction.

In short, these changes enable a strategy that allows one district to have a higher likelihood of electing a candidate of choice for a particular population while suppressing minority populations’ political power through redistricting. With Section 2 of the VRA weakened, such actions have been able to happen quickly and locally, becoming another tactic for disenfranchising voters of color. Black Americans, as well as Latino, Native American, and other voters who have previously been able to leverage the VRA to protect their political power, will have to contend with a weakened law before the midterm elections. 

Other challenges to political representation stem from the Trump administration’s proposed changes to the census. If successful, the 2030 census will determine additional changes to the distribution of the 435 House seats. These changes include: prohibiting questions about race and ethnicity in questionnaires, excluding legal immigrants who do not have a lawful permanent residential status, and prohibiting questions about sexual orientation and identity. The ability to have a full count of residents in the U.S. has additional implications in terms of how federal resources are appropriated to states. These changes will further weaken safety net programs that provide services, direct cash assistance, and healthcare for millions of Americans. The U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the VRA casts a powerful and troubling context as we approach the upcoming midterm elections.  

Currently, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) is most at risk leading up to the midterms. With one of the largest caucuses on Capitol Hill, CBC members are primarily elected from districts that have been targeted for redistricting, already leading to the elimination of seats. In fact, new maps will have sharp consequences for voter turnout and civic engagement, especially if previous jurisdictions with majority-Black voters are diffused across party lines. The social science literature has found evidence that diverse Americans tend to vote at higher rates when they have the opportunity to vote for a co-racial or ethnic candidate. The shift in voting rights protections is projected to significantly decrease the number of diverse elected officials within Congress. This will therefore have sharp and immediate consequences for Black American turnout and overall civic engagement levels.  

In addition to a drop in turnout, the decrease in descriptive representation will have consequences for a number of other important outcomes, including trust in government. As the election approaches and the public becomes more aware of the negative impact the VRA decision will have on their collective political power, there will also be a need for interventions to try to offset the likely drop in political efficacy across the electorate.  

Consequences of shifting mail voting policy 

Perhaps, the most damaging vehicle to stifle Black voters’ participation in the upcoming elections will be the administration’s continued efforts to remake voting by mail. The Supreme Court has added to the concern of election experts who study the voting behavior of racial and ethnic minorities with their actions opening the door for possible implementation of the president’s executive order restricting the use of mail-in voting.  

Trump’s executive order from this past March is focused on creating lists of eligible voters in each state for the U.S. Postal Service to send mail ballots for those deemed qualified under the EO. If implemented, the order would also forbid the Postal Service from sending mail ballots from any state that does not comply with Trump’s order—not surprisingly, Democratic states are those who have sued to avoid compliance with the order. Nearly 30% of voters in the 2024 election cast ballots through the mail, with both Republicans and Democrats using this approach to cast their ballots.  

States vary in how they also implement mail ballots, with a growing number of states having 100% mail-in ballots. This process has already started, as a federal judge has ruled to lift an order preventing the president’s executive order from being implemented which may lead SCOTUS to take this case on before the November elections.   

While it is not clear if the recent SCOTUS action will allow for changes to mail-in-voting access before the upcoming November midterms, most experts predict that the recent decision will generate more lawsuits and create confusion among voters as to whether mail in ballots will be deemed legitimate.  

Given the scale of impact these major structural shifts may have on the access to the ballot box for Black voters, there are steps that can be taken to offset the negative implications of these recent SCOTUS actions. For example:  

• Campaign messages in prior elections focused on generating voter turnout through mobilization against voter disenfranchisement efforts. Similar messaging that stresses the only way to combat these tactics is to vote, can mobilize citizens, especially when paired with messages focused on the expected number of minority elected officials who are projected to lose their seats due to the shifts in VRA legislation.  

• There will be a need for basic information outreach regarding the latest rules for the use of mail ballots to help overcome confusion about whether mail ballots will be accepted. There are many community-based organizations that may need additional resources to help dispel voter mis and dis-information.  

• Enabling voter registration campaigns across environments including high schools, college campuses, faith institutions, social clubs, and other settings can ensure voters have not been purged from the rolls from various tactics to challenge voters.  

Fortunately, the federalist system of government in the U.S. provides states with authority to combat federal intrusion on the voting practices in their borders. The initiative from the federal government to push states to revise how mail ballots are made available to voters crystalizes the importance of the secretary of state position. With candidates for these vital positions who are election deniers in several states across the country and in key roles in the federal government, including the Department of Justice. It is important to examine across each state how individuals are elected or selected for this role, and for voters to think deeply about who they vote for in this often overlooked position on the ballot.  

Recent changes to the Voting Rights Act are complicated and will have a wide range of effects in the coming years if Congress fails to act to help restore any measures of voter equity. The idea of fair elections is in a tailspin as communities grapple with the eminent risks of being undercounted, mis-represented by elected officials, and not having critical resources to address social, economic, and health challenges in their communities. Local and state elections may be the next battleground for fair elections to ensure that voter disenfranchisement is minimized and that voters of color, and voters in lower income communities, have a voice in politics.