The GOP's hope that a key Supreme Court ruling might arrive to give them an edge in the coming midterms is starting to evaporate, according to a report from Politico, as election deadlines approach with no ruling in sight.
The court — weighted 6-to-3 in favor of conservative justices and known for recent rulings that heavily favor Republicans — is set to weigh in on the case of Louisiana v. Callais, and is widely expected to rule in a manner that will gut portions of the Voting Rights Act. Specifically, the justices are expected to nullify a section of the bill put in place to prevent the use of gerrymandering to create congressional districts that infringe upon minority voters and candidates.
If this section is gutted by the court, Republican-led states, particularly those in the South, will no longer have a legal obligation to protect majority Black or Hispanic districts, which could allow them even more leeway to create districts that favor Republican candidates. With the party staring down a potential wipeout from Democrats in the 2026 midterms, this potential Supreme Court ruling has been seen as one of their best bets for mitigating the damage or preventing the loss of their House majority altogether.
Now, however, the likelihood that the ruling will come down in time to help the party in time for this year's elections is looking slimmer and slimmer. As Politico noted in a report from Thursday, experts believe that the decision is more likely to come down near the end of the court's current term in June. At that point, it will be too late for a lot of red states to act.
"The window of opportunity for new maps going into place before this November’s elections is rapidly closing, as states would need ample time to change deadlines, shift election calendars, vet signatures and print and distribute ballots," Politico explained. "And the longer it takes for the Supreme Court to issue a ruling, the harder it will be for state-level Republicans to throw their maps out and draw new ones before this fall’s elections."
“If it’s in any way a big deal, we’re not going to get that decision before June,” Justin Levitt, a professor of law at Loyola Law School and former advisor to Joe Biden on democracy and voting rights, told Politico. “It’s really hard for me to see a decision that does anything significant that wouldn’t occasion a major dissent, and it’s really hard for me to see that dissent not taking a fairly long time in the back-and-forth.”
At least a few states have already given up on the potential boon for now. Politico reported that Louisiana, the plaintiff in the case before the Supreme Court, has already committed to using its current maps for 2026.
“It can get very complicated and very sticky, and that is not fast work,” Tammy Patrick, the chief programs officer for the non-partisan Election Center consulting firm, explained. “That is time-consuming, very methodical and detail-oriented work that needs to have sufficient time.”
