Gerrymandering Explorer

Some federal rules on districting

• For the U.S. House, federal law requires each state with more than one seat to elect its representatives from districts, one representative per district. 2 U.S.C. 2c
• The text of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars any state or local voting standard, practice or procedure that results in denying or abridging a citizen’s right to vote on account of race or color, or in violation of the guarantees in Section 4(f)(2) of the act (52 U.S.C. 10303(f)(2)). Voting Rights Act, sec. 2
• Section 4(f)(2) of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. 10303(f)(2)) protects members of language minority groups: no voting standard, practice or procedure may deny or abridge a citizen’s right to vote because the citizen belongs to one. Voting Rights Act, sec. 4
• The statute says a Section 2 violation is shown when, based on the totality of circumstances, the political process is not equally open to members of a protected class, in that they have less opportunity than other voters to participate and to elect representatives of their choice. Voting Rights Act, sec. 2
• Section 2 creates no right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their share of the population. Voting Rights Act, sec. 2
• For districting claims, the Supreme Court in Louisiana v. Callais (2026) read Section 2’s text to impose liability only when the evidence supports a strong inference that the state intentionally drew its districts to give minority voters less opportunity because of their race. Louisiana v. Callais
• The Court in Callais also said that in judging whether a districting plan is constitutional, courts must treat partisan advantage like any other race-neutral aim: a constitutionally permissible criterion that states may rely on as they wish. Louisiana v. Callais
• In Allen v. Milligan (2023), the Supreme Court affirmed a ruling that preliminarily barred Alabama from using its 2022 congressional district map because the map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act; the Court had stayed that order while it reviewed the case. The Court said Callais did not overrule the 2023 Allen v. Milligan decision: the Allen Court decided that case on the parties’ arguments, and Alabama had not defended its map there as drawn for a political objective. Allen v. Milligan (2023)Louisiana v. Callais
• In a June 2, 2026, ruling after Callais, the Court, which said Callais had updated the standards for Section 2 liability, stayed a new federal district court injunction against Alabama’s 2023 congressional map, saying the state had shown at that preliminary stage that it was entitled to interim relief. Allen v. Milligan (2026)

Partisan gerrymandering in court

• In Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), the Supreme Court concluded that claims of partisan gerrymandering present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts. Rucho v. Common Cause
• The Court quoted the plurality opinion in Davis v. Bandemer: its cases clearly foreclose any claim that the Constitution requires proportional representation, or that legislatures in reapportioning must draw district lines to come as near as possible to allocating seats to the parties in proportion to their anticipated statewide vote. Rucho v. Common Cause
• The Court noted that states are addressing partisan gerrymandering on a number of fronts: some give independent commissions some or all of the power to draw districts, some require mapmakers to follow at least some traditional districting criteria, and some outright prohibit partisan favoritism in redistricting. Rucho v. Common Cause
• The Court noted that in 2015 Florida’s Supreme Court struck down that state’s congressional map under the Fair Districts Amendment to the Florida Constitution, and that state statutes and constitutions can give state courts standards to apply. Rucho v. Common Cause
• The Court also pointed to the power the Constitution’s Elections Clause gives Congress to address partisan gerrymandering, an avenue for reform it said remains open. Rucho v. Common Cause

GovFacts last checked the Supreme Court rulings on this page on Sept. 25, 2026.