control
Dec 19, 2025

Supreme Court Could Still Tilt Midterms Toward Republicans

The U.S. Supreme Court made headlines last week when it ruled to keep New York’s current congressional map in place, temporarily blocking a lower court ruling that had found the map violated the Constitution by diluting the voting power of Black and Latino residents.

The unsigned emergency order did not include a vote count or written reasoning, which is typical for decisions issued on the court’s emergency docket. The decision allows the existing map to remain in place while appeals continue, making it likely the map will be used in the upcoming midterm elections.

The ruling was a victory for Republicans and could help them retain control of a closely divided House of Representatives.

Representative Nicole Malliotakis, a Republican whose district includes Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn, filed the emergency application after a state judge ordered her district to be redrawn.

The case centers on New York’s 11th Congressional District, the only district in New York City currently held by a Republican.

That ruling comes as the Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in a Louisiana redistricting case that could affect how the Voting Rights Act is applied in election disputes.

The case, Louisiana v. Callais, challenges a congressional map approved by Louisiana lawmakers that created a second majority Black district after earlier court challenges.

The dispute centers on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which allows private individuals and organizations to challenge election laws or redistricting plans they argue dilute the voting power of minority communities, The Intelligencer reported.

The Supreme Court previously ordered the case to be reargued, a step that signaled the justices may revisit how race can be considered when drawing congressional districts.

During oral arguments, the justices examined whether the use of race to create majority minority districts could conflict with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act has been the primary legal tool for challenging redistricting plans since the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder.

That ruling eliminated the law’s preclearance provision, which previously required certain states to obtain federal approval before implementing changes to election laws.

A decision could also influence future redistricting efforts in states where one party controls the legislature and the governor’s office.

Other posts