A Supreme Court decision that struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act could have wide-ranging impacts, including in Illinois.
That 6-3 ruling found the state of Louisiana’s second majority Black Congressional district relied too heavily on race when it was drawn, which critics say could effectively gut the VRA and allow legislatures to radically redraw Congressional maps.
In the aftermath of the decision, Illinois State Senate President Don Harmon said a potential constitutional amendment on redistricting in the state will not advance during the current session, giving the state’s legal team time to review the court’s ruling.
He did express confidence that the state’s current election maps are sound however.
“Illinois will not go back. We will not look the other way and call it equity. We will dissect this decision, find a path forward and continue to protect the rights of all Illinoisans. I would ask for patience and time for our state’s top legal experts to work through this. The last thing we want is to act in haste and risk unintended consequences down the road. Too much is at stake for too many,” said Harmon.
Illinois’ map has been criticized for creating racially drawn districts, ensuring that Black and Latino voters are represented in the state’s delegation.
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker criticized the court’s ruling.
“We must call this for what it is: voter suppression that will silence Black and brown voters,” the governor said on social media. “The magnitude of this decision cannot be understated — it guts the Voting Rights Act and its very purpose of protecting all voices. Every American deserves an equal vote.”
At question in the Supreme Court case was Section 2, which allows mechanisms to challenge racially discriminatory election practices.
In a 6-3 vote, the court’s conservative majority found the state’s second majority Black congressional district, represented by Democrat Cleo Fields, relied too heavily on race, according to NBC News.
“That map is an unconstitutional gerrymander,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority in the case, which included all six of the court’s conservative justices.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissent for the three liberal justices on the court.
“The consequences are likely to be far-reaching and grave. Today’s decision renders Section 2 all but a dead letter,” she said.
Alito’s ruling held that Section 2 is limited to instances of “intentional discrimination,” which legal scholars say is an extremely high standard that could make it extremely difficult to appeal the drawing of maps.
Nearly 70 of the 435 congressional districts are protected by Section 2, election law expert Nicholas Stephanopoulos has estimated, according to NBC News.
