Today, Explained The Supreme Court's gerrymaxxing
59 snips
May 4, 2026 
Sophia Lynn Lakin, ACLU voting-rights litigator, and Ian Millhiser, Vox Supreme Court correspondent, dig into a ruling that turbocharges partisan mapmaking. They track Louisiana’s rapid redraw, which states could race to redraw next, the legal fight over mid-election changes, and the growing clash between voting-rights protections and bare-knuckle political strategy.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Louisiana Immediately Paused Elections To Redraw
- Louisiana moved almost immediately after the ruling by suspending its US House elections and planning a whiter, more Republican map.
- Ian Millhiser says Tennessee, Alabama, and probably Mississippi may follow before the midterms, while Georgia said it will not.
How Section 2 Used To Counter Vote Dilution
- Ian Millhiser says the old Voting Rights Act rule targeted places where residential segregation and racially polarized voting let the majority capture too many seats.
- In those states, courts could require extra majority-Black or Latino districts so one racial group was not cut out of representation.
Rucho Opened The Gerrymandering Arms Race
- Ian Millhiser argues the real accelerant was not this ruling alone but the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Rucho removing federal courts from partisan gerrymandering fights.
- Once courts said they would never intervene, states gained permission to redraw maps whenever power flips.