What the Supreme Court’s Redistricting Ruling Actually Means for Mississippi

Part One - US Supreme Court Decision

If you’ve scrolled through Facebook lately, you’ve probably seen one of two takes on the recent redistricting fight. Either the U.S. Supreme Court “gutted” the Voting Rights Act, or conservatives finally got the green light to redraw any map they want. Both takes are wrong, and the actual story has moved fast over the last two weeks.

I think we owe our neighbors a straight explanation, without the talk-radio heat or the social-media hype. Here is part one of two.

Start with the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 29, the Court decided a case called Louisiana v. Callais. The vote was 6-3. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion.

After the 2020 census, Louisiana drew a new congressional map. A federal court said the map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the part of federal law that bans practices that dilute minority voting strength. Louisiana’s Legislature then drew a second majority-Black district to fix the problem. A different group of voters sued, saying the new map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, meaning race had been the main factor in drawing the lines.

The Supreme Court agreed with the second group. It ruled that Louisiana was not actually required to draw a second majority-Black district, so race-based map-drawing was not justified. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act still exists. Anyone telling you the Voting Rights Act is gone is wrong. But the legal test plaintiffs have to pass in these cases is now significantly harder. Basically, the bar moved.

Now to Mississippi. We have a related case that has been moving through the federal courts. Our three state Supreme Court districts — Northern, Central, and Southern — have not been redrawn since 1987. In August 2025, U.S. District Judge Sharion Aycock, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled those districts violate Section 2, especially the Central District that covers the Delta and Jackson area. She ordered them redrawn. The 2026 regular session of the Legislature ended without a new map. Governor Tate Reeves then called a special session for May 20 to comply with the order before the federal court imposed one.

Here is where the story changed. On Monday, May 11, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Judge Aycock’s order and sent the case back to her court for reconsideration under the new Callais standard. The motion to do that was filed jointly by both sides — the NAACP, ACLU and other plaintiffs on one side, the State of Mississippi on the other. Both agreed the legal ground had shifted under their feet.

What does this mean? The order requiring Mississippi to redraw the Supreme Court districts no longer exists. The case is not closed — Judge Aycock will look at it again under the tougher Callais standard, and the plaintiffs can amend their arguments. As of this writing, it is not clear whether the Governor will still hold the May 20 special session, postpone it, or use the call for other redistricting matters.

That is the immediate situation. One Supreme Court ruling. One federal-court order, now vacated. One special session, now cancelled. Three weeks ago this looked like a forced march to redraw judicial districts. Today it looks like the system pumping the brakes to apply new precedent.

In part two, I will get into what the Legislature actually has to decide, the louder argument about Mississippi’s congressional map, and what all of this might mean for us in Mississippi.