‘A devastating blow’: major civil rights group calls supreme court ruling on voting case ‘a major setback for our nation’ – live

Today, the supreme court’s conservative majority struck down a major element of the Voting Rights Act which protects against racial discrimination in redistricting, in a ruling that paves the way for aggressive gerrymandering in states across the nation that could affect elections for years to come.

As my colleague Sam Levine notes, at the heart of the case, Louisiana v Callais, was a question of how much lawmakers are allowed to consider race when they redraw districts to ensure that black voters are adequately represented.

The court struck down a majority-black congressional district in Louisiana, rendering ineffective section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the last remaining powerful provision of the 1965 civil rights law that prevents racial discrimination in voting. Section 2 has long been used to ensure minority voters are treated fairly in redistricting.

The 6-3 decision, split along partisan lines, gives lawmakers permission to draw districting plans that weaken the influence of black and other minority voters. It comes as Donald Trump has pushed for red states to redraw their congressional maps in ways that would help Republicans win more seats in this year’s elections.

“Allowing race to play any part in government decision-making represents a departure from the constitutional rule that applies in almost every other context,” conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority opinion. “Compliance with section 2 thus could not justify the state’s use of race-based redistricting here. The state’s attempt to satisfy the middle district’s ruling, although understandable, was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.”

In a dissenting opinion, liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote the court had now accomplished a “demolition of the Voting Rights Act”.

Under the court’s new view of section 2, a state can, without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power. The majority claims only to be ‘updat[ing]’ our section 2 law, as though through a few technical tweaks. In fact, those ‘updates’ eviscerate the law.

Today’s decision renders section 2 all but a dead letter. The decision here is about Louisiana’s district 6. But so too it is about Louisiana’s district 2. And so too it is about the many other districts, particularly in the south, that in the last half-century have given minority citizens, and particularly African Americans, a meaningful political voice. After today, those districts exist only on sufferance, and probably not for long.

Reactions have poured in from lawmakers and civil rights groups, condemning the supreme court’s decision.

• The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) called the ruling “a devastating blow to what remains of the Voting Rights Act” and “a major setback for our nation”. The ruling is “a license for corrupt politicians who want to rig the system by silencing entire communities”, president Derrick Johnson said in a statement. “The Supreme Court betrayed Black voters, they betrayed America, and they betrayed our democracy.”

• Former president Barack Obama said the ruling “effectively gut[s] a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act” and frees “state legislatures to gerrymander legislative districts to systematically dilute and weaken the voting power of racial minorities – so long as they do it under the guise of ‘partisanship’ rather than explicit ‘racial bias’”.

• “This is a day of tremendous loss. It’s a day of loss for our democracy,” said Janai Nelson, who leads NAACP LDF and argued the case at the supreme court. “It’s a day of loss for critical protections for the right to vote that have served our multiracial democracy for over six decades. It’s a day of loss for Black voters in Louisiana who have counted on fair maps to allow them representation that they have been denied for their entire existence in that state.”

• Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project, called the ruling “a profound betrayal of the civil rights movement”. Today’s decision in Callais renders Section 2 moot as “it will be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce in the vast majority of cases,” she said.

• Former House speaker Nancy Pelosi called the ruling a “new blow” against the “sacred right to vote”. “The consequences will be felt across the country: fewer voices heard, fewer communities represented and a democracy diminished,” she said.

• Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said, the “supreme court just turned its back on one of the most sacred promises in American democracy — the promise that every voice counts”.

• His House counterpart, Hakeem Jeffries, called the decision “corrupt”. “Voter suppression is a way of life for Donald Trump and far right extremists on the Supreme Court,” he said. “Republicans know they cannot win a free and fair election in November and so they are desperate to rig it. We will never let them succeed.”

• Georgia senator Reverend Raphael Warnock said the decision “further ravaged” the Voting Rights Act and left the country “at a crossroads where politicians are picking their voters”. “Clearly, we are straying further from the core voting principles that helped create the diverse body that people see representing them today,” he said. “We must restore the Voting Rights Act and ban gerrymandering. Our democracy is on the line.”

• Representative Troy Carter, whose predominately black congressional district encompasses New Orleans, said “the consequences of the high court’s decision will be “immediate and severe” and that Louisiana’s two majority-black congressional districts are now at risk of being dismantled. “Without the protections of the Voting Rights Act, there is no evidence to suggest that Black voters in our state will be able to elect candidates of their choice,” he said.

• New Orleans mayor Helena Moreno, a Democrat who represents the largest city in Louisiana’s other predominantly black congressional district, said the supreme court’s ruling was “a step backward”. “Striking down a district that reflected diversity suppresses voices and weakens our democracy. We should be working to expand representation, not roll it back,” she said.

• Lauren Groh-Wargo, executive director of Fair Fight Action, said the supreme court’s decision “guts” voting rights protection while “pretending to uphold it”. “It allows states, counties and cities to shield their discriminatory maps by claiming they are advancing their own partisan interests, ignoring that race and party are highly correlated in places across the country, particularly the south,” she said.

For more reaction to this landmark decision, please read my colleague Fabiola Cineas’s piece here:

Asked about his decision to stay on as a Fed governor, Powell said his concern was about “the series of legal attacks on the Fed, which threaten our ability to conduct monetary policy without considering political factors”.

He said he doesn’t mind verbal criticism by elected officials, but said the administration’s legal attacks on him “are unprecedented in our 113-year history, and there are ongoing threats of additional such actions”.

I worry that these attacks are battering the institution and putting at risk the thing that really matters to the public, which is the ability to conduct monetary policy without taking into consideration political factors.

Powell also congratulated Kevin Warsh on his advancement towards being confirmed as his successor as Federal Reserve chair by the Senate.

Powell described the Senate vote as “an important step”, adding: “I wish him well as that process continues.”

More now from outgoing Fed chair Jerome Powell, who said that while he US economy is expanding, “inflation has moved up with growing global energy prices”.

“Developments in the Middle East are contributing to high levels of uncertainty,” he said.

Consumer sentiment was “resilient” though, he added, and “economic activity has been expanding at a solid pace”.

Former president Barack Obama has issued this statement in reaction to the supreme court’s landmark decision today to “effectively gut a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act”.

He said the ruling frees “state legislatures to gerrymander legislative districts to systematically dilute and weaken the voting power of racial minorities – so long as they do it under the guise of ‘partisanship’ rather than explicit ‘racial bias’”.

And it serves as just one more example of how a majority of the current Court seems intent on abandoning its vital role in ensuring equal participation in our democracy and protecting the rights of minority groups against majority overreach.

The good news is that such setbacks can be overcome. But that will only happen if citizens across the country who cherish our democratic ideals continue to mobilize and vote in record numbers – not just in the upcoming midterms or in high profile races, but in every election and every level.

I asked Sophia Lin Lakin, the ACLU’s top voting rights lawyer, and Janai Nelson, the NAACP LDF lawyer who argued in defense of Louisiana’s map at the supreme court, whether or not there was any pathway for continuing to bring Section 2 claims in federal court after today’s decision.

“Theoretically, yes, there are still some possibilities there … academically speaking there are some pathways there,” Nelson said. “But I think that those require conditions that I don’t see present based on current demographics, voting patterns and what has become an increasingly hyper polarized partisan landscape.”

Lakin added that non-partisan elections are one area where plaintiffs might have some additional remaining leeway to bring Section 2 claims.

Outgoing Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell said he will stay on as a central bank governor when his leadership term ends in just over two weeks.

“After my term as chair ends on May 15, I will continue to serve as a governor for a period of time to be determined,” Powell said, adding that he planned to “keep a low profile” as a governor.

Powell noted US attorney Jeanine Pirro’s announcement on Friday, ending the criminal investigation against him but also cautioning that she could reopen it.

The move cleared a hurdle for Trump’s pick Kevin Warsh to be confirmed, as GOP senator Thom Tillis had said he wouldn’t vote to confirm him until the probe into Powell was dropped. The Fed’s inspector general has instead been asked to look into potential “building cost overruns” in the central bank’s renovation of its Washington DC headquarters, Pirro said.

He said he would not be leaving the Fed’s board of governors until the DOJ’s investigation into him is “well and truly over”.

I’ve said that I will not leave the board until this investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality, and I stand by that.

He added: “I’m encouraged by recent developments, and I’m watching the remaining steps in this process carefully. My decisions on these matters will continue to be guided entirely by what I believe is in the best interest of the institution and the people we serve.”

Trump was then asked a follow-up question about the ruling. The president asked again when the ruling came out (this morning!), before asking the reporter if it was a win for Republicans. Told that it was, he said:

I love it! I want to read it. Wow!

He was asked if he believed more Republican governors should pursue redrawing their congressional maps following the ruling, given that early voting in some places begins on Saturday.

Trump said it would depend on the state and whether they have time to do it, but generally they should do it.

Donald Trump was also asked for his reaction to today’s supreme court ruling on the Voting Rights Act – to which the president said he didn’t know about it.

“You have to tell me, when did the ruling come out?” he asked the reporter, adding he’s been meeting with the astronauts and with contractors trying to get his ballroom built.

When he was told that the ruling might help Republicans gain more congressional seats in the south, the president responded:

That’s good, that’s the kind of ruling I like.

He then asked when this happened, and was told this morning.

Just before we get to that, Donald Trump has been taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office following his meeting with the Artemis II astronauts.

The president said he had a “very good conversation” with Vladimir Putin today about Ukraine and Iran.

“I think he’d like to see a solution, and that’s good,” he said, though it wasn’t clear if he was talking about Ukraine or Iran, or both (unlikely).

Trump then said that he “suggested a little bit of a ceasefire” to Putin “and I think he might do that”. He then asked the reporter if Putin had announced it yet (spoiler: he hasn’t).

And with that, Jerome Powell is due to shortly give what will likely be his last press conference as chair of the Federal Reserve.

I’ll be watching and will bring you any key lines that come out of that.