A Partisan Arms Race

In the 2026 legislative session, Louisiana was once again at the center of the partisan arms race of redistricting. As the May 16 election approached and early voting started, many of us who were tracking the Louisiana v Callais case thought that the Supreme Court might wait until after spring primaries to issue a ruling. That turned out to not be the case, as we found out on April 29th, when the Supreme Court ruled that drawing congressional districts with race as a primary consideration was unconstitutional discrimination.

Senator Jay Morris (R-West Monroe) and Senator Ed Price (D-Gonzales) had both filed placeholder redistricting bills in February and March, in anticipation of a decision during the legislative session. After the Supreme Court issued a decision, the bills updated with the following proposed maps:

• SB 407 by Senator Price: A map without any majority Black districts, with four majority Republican districts and two majority Democratic districts.

• SB 121 by Senator Morris: A map with one majority Black, majority Democratic district and five majority white, majority Republican districts, and was comparable to the map passed in 2022 that was successfully challenged in the Supreme Court that ultimately led to the creation of Rep. Cleo Fields’s seat.

• SB 130 by Senator Morris: A map that proposed one majority Black, majority Democratic district and five majority white, majority Republican districts.

• SB 116 by Senator Morris: A map that proposed six majority white, majority Republican districts.

At the first committee hearing for these bills, Senator Gary Carter fervently questioned Senator Morris about his redistricting efforts in the context of Senator Morris’s other legislation, which included the elimination of New Orleans criminal clerk of court-elect Calvin Duncan’s position and eliminating local judgeships in New Orleans, a couple of which are held by Black judges. The hearing adjourned early, after the chair of the committee turned off Senator Carter’s microphone and the audience spoke while Senator Morris was being questioned. 

The second committee hearing for these bills lasted from 6:30pm until 4:30am the next morning. Senator Morris withdrew SB 116 and SB 130, leaving only Senator Price’s SB 407 and Senator Morris’s SB 121. The committee debated SB 407 first, which ultimately failed along party lines, with all Republicans voting against it and all Democrats voting in favor, a partisan theme that would essentially dominate the rest of the process. The committee then debated SB 121, which ultimately passed along party lines. SB 121 was debated just two days later on the Senate floor, where it also passed along party lines. In each step of the process, only Republicans voted for SB121, while all Democrats voted against it. 

The third and final committee hearing took place on Thursday, May 21. Representative Denise Marcelle (D-Baton Rouge) and advocates pointed out that the demographic data included in SB 121 does not match data from the Secretary of State, but the bill, again, passed along party lines. From there, it went to the House floor, where it passed, but also saw the first break with the straight party line voting, as a couple of Republican representatives voted against it on the grounds that it split their local areas in ways they weren’t amenable to.  

What This Means

Much of the opposition to SB 121 focused on the fact that, for many Louisianans, this bill painfully echoes the policies of the Jim Crow South. The Callais case does not disallow race-based redistricting or the creation of majority Black districts, it only says that race cannot be the predominant factor. 

However, the Republicans of the Louisiana legislature have made the decision to move forward only a bill that dilutes Black voting power. The creation of policies like racist home deeds and segregated public facilities were not required by the judicial branch. But, by pulling back equality requirements in Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court paved the way for individual, private practices to discriminate against Black people.

Beyond the historical and political implications of eliminating one of Louisiana’s two majority-Black congressional districts, Louisiana’s redistricting fight follows a redistricting trend across the U.S. We wrote last fall about how partisan redistricting could become a partisan death spiral, and that's what we’re seeing right now.

Senator Morris and other proponents of the bill held that SB 121 is not race-based, but party-based and is a partisan gerrymander. Partisan gerrymandering is permitted at the Federal level, though some states like Florida and New Hampshire outlaw it. 

But, the majority of Americans would prefer a less polarized political system, and would like to see a third political party gain traction. A third of Louisiana voters are registered as “No Party” voters, or registered with a party other than the Democratic or Republican parties. The majority of Americans, regardless of race and party affiliation, have the same concerns about the cost of living, increasing rent and insurance, expensive medical treatments, aging and failing infrastructure, and job security. 

So, if most Americans–and as a subsection of that population, Louisianans—share the same problems, why are we all forced to engage in yet another partisan arms race?