Callais v. Louisiana
Coverage of Callais v. Louisiana in the Nexus archive.
- Louisiana House candidate accused of rape says he hopes to again ‘earn’ Trump endorsement
Republican Blake Miguez, a congressional candidate in Louisiana accused of rape (which he denies), is considering which district to run in after redistricting following a Supreme Court decision and hopes to again earn Donald Trump's endorsement.
- Who is the Supreme Court’s most “ideological” justice? And does that question even make sense?
The article examines the complexity of labeling Supreme Court justices as 'ideological,' noting that judicial decisions often defy simple liberal-conservative divisions. It highlights cases like Trump v. Barbara and Chatrie v. United States, where majority coalitions included justices from different perceived ideological blocs, and discusses challenges in measuring ideology through emergency dockets.
- When and why did complying with the Voting Rights Act become unconstitutional?
The article discusses the Supreme Court case Callais v. Louisiana, which impacted vote-dilution claims under the Voting Rights Act and raised questions about whether a new standard for racial gerrymandering under the Fourteenth Amendment was established. The decision, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, left uncertainty about whether intentional racial intent or mere predominance of race in redistricting constitutes a constitutional violation.