The U.S. Supreme Court appears ready to weaken one of the nation’s most important civil rights laws — the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Enacted under President Lyndon B. Johnson and championed by Martin Luther King Jr., the law outlawed racial discrimination in voting. Now, nearly 60 years later, its Section 2, which prohibits voting practices that dilute minority voting power, faces a serious threat.
The latest challenge stems from Louisiana, where Black residents make up one-third of the population. A Republican-led legislature added a second Black-majority congressional district after a court found the previous map violated Section 2. However, white voters sued, claiming the redrawn map placed too much emphasis on race and violated constitutional equal protection rights. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority signaled support for curbing Section 2’s reach during arguments on Wednesday.
The Justice Department, echoing Trump-era arguments, proposed a framework giving states greater flexibility to prioritize “race-neutral” districting principles. Legal experts warn this approach could make proving racial discrimination in redistricting cases nearly impossible. George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton said such a ruling would “effectively gut” Section 2, allowing state legislatures to entrench partisan power and marginalize minority voters.
The Voting Rights Act, strengthened in 1982 by adding the “results test,” once served as a powerful tool against systemic discrimination. But the Supreme Court has gradually weakened it — notably in the 2013 Shelby County v. Holderdecision that ended federal oversight of states with histories of discrimination. Now, justices may further erode protections under the guise of constitutional colorblindness.
If the Court limits Section 2 enforcement, analysts say Republicans could gain up to 19 congressional seats, reshaping the political map. Civil rights advocates, including the ACLU, vow to continue the fight for fair representation and equal access to the ballot box, warning that this decision could define the future of U.S. democracy.


Supreme Court Tests Federal Reserve Independence Amid Trump’s Bid to Fire Lisa Cook
Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Move to End TPS for Haitian Immigrants
Costa Rica Election: Laura Fernandez Wins Presidency as PPSO Secures Congressional Majority
Trump Says Fed Pick Kevin Warsh Could Win Democratic Support in Senate Confirmation
Panama Supreme Court Voids Hong Kong Firm’s Panama Canal Port Contracts Over Constitutional Violations
Laura Fernandez Set to Become Costa Rica’s Next President, Promising Sweeping Political Change
U.S. Accuses Cuba of Harassing Top Diplomat Amid Rising Tensions
Israel Reopens Rafah Crossing, Offering Limited Relief to Gaza Patients Amid Ceasefire Efforts
Google Halts UK YouTube TV Measurement Service After Legal Action
Taiwan Urges Stronger Trade Ties With Fellow Democracies, Rejects Economic Dependence on China
Federal Judge Rules Trump Administration Unlawfully Halted EV Charger Funding
Russian Drone Strike Kills Miners as Ukraine Pushes for Peace Talks Amid Energy Crisis
Trump Announces U.S.–India Trade Deal Cutting Tariffs, Boosting Markets and Energy Ties
Brazil Supreme Court Orders Asset Freeze of Nelson Tanure Amid Banco Master Investigation
Elon Musk Seeks $134 Billion in Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Microsoft Over Alleged Wrongful Gains
Panama Supreme Court Voids CK Hutchison Port Concessions, Raising Geopolitical and Trade Concerns
Medvedev Warns World Is Growing More Dangerous but Says Russia Seeks to Avoid Global Conflict 



