Abrams Denounces GOP Redistricting After 1 Key Voting Rights Act Pillar Was Gutted
Updated
Updated · The Guardian · May 13
Abrams Denounces GOP Redistricting After 1 Key Voting Rights Act Pillar Was Gutted
1 articles · Updated · The Guardian · May 13
Stacey Abrams called Republican-led redistricting "evil incarnate," saying states are using newly weakened voting-rights protections to erase majority-minority districts and entrench power before upcoming elections.
Two weeks after the Supreme Court's Louisiana v Callais ruling gutted a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act, Abrams said the map changes amount to intentional suppression of racial minority voting power.
Tennessee became her clearest example: Memphis-based District 9, the state's last majority-Black district, was split three ways, leaving all 9 congressional districts Republican-leaning.
Abrams urged a two-track response—keep suing even in likely losses to build a legal record, and expand voter registration and turnout in fractured districts she said now create "3 new opportunities."
She cast the fight as bigger than party politics, warning the US is sliding toward "competitive authoritarianism" even as demographic change points to a majority-minority country by 2046.
Can higher voter turnout truly counteract the effects of new maps designed to dilute community voting power?
Aftermath of Louisiana v. Callais: Supreme Court Ruling Reshapes Redistricting, Weakens Voting Rights Act, and Threatens Minority Representation in 2026
Overview
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais on April 29, 2026, immediately set off a rapid and contentious response in several Republican-led states. This decision fundamentally reshaped congressional maps and election timelines, causing Louisiana to suspend its ongoing primary and prompting other states to redraw their maps even after candidate filing deadlines. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized the Court for taking sides and being inconsistent in its actions. The ruling struck down a map that had given Black voters a chance to elect candidates of their choice, upending decades of precedent and limiting options to challenge discriminatory maps.