Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, said a major new decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in Louisiana v. Callais dramatically raises the bar for using the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to justify race-based congressional districts.
The Court ruled 6-3 on Wednesday that Louisiana’s revised congressional map, which was designed to create a second majority-Black district, constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito emphasized that race-based districting must meet a very high constitutional bar.
Appearing on Wednesday’s edition of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show, Phillips said the decision raises that bar even further.
“Basically what has happened here is in the decision, Justice Alito said in order to claim the Voting Rights Act to invoke that, to create these minority districts, you basically have to show that drawing it otherwise is being done intentionally to prevent minority representation and to do it intentionally. That is huge. That is a very difficult standard to overcome,” he explained.
Phillips noted that while the Court did not strike down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act outright, the ruling significantly limits how it can be used.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing in dissent, warned that the majority’s reasoning could weaken protections against racial vote dilution.
“Far be it for me to ever agree with Kagan about something. But there’s a part where she’s not necessarily wrong, where she says the Voting Rights Act is pretty much dead. I wouldn’t go quite that far, but I’ll tell you what, this does gut a lot of the activism you’re gonna see from these federal judges that just think they have the power to redraw all of these districts,” he said.
The ruling also included a concurrence from Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, suggesting that Section 2 should not apply to redistricting at all. Phillips interpreted that as a signal of how far some justices were willing to go.
“If Thomas had his way, the entire section two of the Voting Rights Act would’ve been declared unconstitutional. And that’s what a lot of conservative activists wanted out of this,” he noted.
Beyond the legal reasoning, Phillips emphasized the practical and political implications of the decision nationwide.
“It’s two body blows to the Democrats’ efforts to take the House of Representatives back in this election in 2026,” he stressed.
Phillips pointed to the possibility that states could revisit their congressional maps under the new legal standard.
“Florida’s already planning on redistricting again… Texas may redraw… Tennessee can redraw, Alabama can redraw,” he noted.
Phillips argued that the decision opens the door for additional redistricting efforts, provided lawmakers avoid explicit racial intent.
“As long as you’re not doing it intentionally… short of the governor sending out an email to somebody saying, yes, I want to cut Memphis up… short of something that stupid, Tennessee can redistrict,” he explained.
Overall, Phillips characterized the ruling as a turning point in redistricting law.
“Alito comes out with about as good as we’re gonna get,” he said.
Tune in now to The Michael Patrick Leahy Show – your AMERICA FIRST news talk!
– Watch LIVE here on X
– Watch LIVE on YouTube / Rumble / Roku / AppleTV
– Listen on Spotify
– Listen on WENO AM760 in Nashville
– Read more at @TheTNStarhttps://t.co/6KMCGCVNzj— Michael Patrick Leahy (@michaelpleahy) April 29, 2026
– – –
Kaitlin Housler is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network. Follow Kaitlin on X.
