Southern States Move to Redraw Congressional Maps After Supreme Court Ruling

Republican governors in Tennessee and Alabama have called special legislative sessions to reconsider congressional district maps following a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that narrowed protections under the Voting Rights Act. The ruling, issued Wednesday in Louisiana v. Callais, struck down a Louisiana map with two majority-Black districts, finding that lawmakers relied too heavily on race in drawing districts. This decision has prompted several Southern states to explore redrawing their maps ahead of upcoming elections.

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee announced a special session starting Tuesday, emphasizing the need for congressional districts that “accurately reflect the will of Tennessee voters.” Lee urged swift action, noting the state’s primaries are scheduled for August 6, though candidate filing deadlines have passed. GOP Senator Marsha Blackburn, who is running for governor, has pushed for a map favoring Republicans in all nine districts, including splitting the Memphis-area district held by Democrat Steve Cohen. Former President Donald Trump has also called on Lee to redraw the map to gain an additional Republican seat.

In Alabama, Governor Kay Ivey convened a special session beginning Monday to potentially reschedule the state’s May 19 primaries. Alabama’s current map, drawn by a court-appointed expert after prior maps were struck down for violating the Voting Rights Act, includes two districts where Black voters have significant influence and are represented by Democrats. Ivey expressed a desire to revert to the 2023 legislature-drawn map, which featured only one majority-Black Democratic-leaning district, contingent on court approval. The state’s attorney general, Steve Marshall, filed an emergency motion with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the lower court ruling that blocked the 2023 map, citing the recent high court decision.

The Alabama primaries were originally set under the court-ordered map, but Ivey stated, “By calling the Legislature into a special session, I am ensuring Alabama is prepared should the courts act quickly enough to allow Alabama’s previously drawn congressional and state Senate maps to be used during this election cycle.”

Other Southern states are also reacting. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry halted the state’s ongoing primaries to redraw maps, prompting voting rights groups to sue to keep the elections on schedule. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster suggested his state might follow suit, stating the legislature should ensure compliance with federal law in light of the Supreme Court ruling. South Carolina’s primary is scheduled for June 9.

Meanwhile, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp announced he will not delay the state’s May 19 primaries despite the ruling, noting that voting is already underway for the 2026 elections. Kemp said the decision requires Georgia to adopt new maps before the 2028 cycle and praised the ruling for restoring fairness by allowing states to pass electoral maps reflecting voters’ will rather than federal judges’.

The Supreme Court’s decision effectively narrows Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, now requiring a “strong inference that intentional discrimination occurred” for districts to be found in violation. This change is expected to trigger a wave of mid-decade redistricting efforts across the country, including in Mississippi, where lawmakers plan a special session to redraw Supreme Court districts and possibly congressional maps.

Prior to this ruling, several states had already engaged in mid-decade redistricting aimed at shifting partisan balances ahead of the 2026 midterms. Texas moved five Democratic districts toward Republicans, California shifted five Republican-held districts leftward, and Missouri and North Carolina each adjusted one Democratic district. Virginia voters recently approved adding four new districts favoring Democrats.

The evolving legal landscape is prompting states to reconsider their political maps amid tight election timelines and ongoing litigation.