Louisiana lawmakers gave final approval Friday to a new congressional map that reshapes the state's delegation in Republicans' favor, eliminating a Black-majority district and setting the stage for a 5-1 GOP advantage heading into the 2026 midterms.
The vote caps a fast-moving redistricting battle triggered by the U.S. Supreme Court, which struck down the state's existing map after finding that legislators had relied too heavily on race when drawing the 6th Congressional District. Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, is expected to sign the bill promptly.
The new map redraws the 6th District, currently held by Democratic Rep. Cleo Fields, to make it significantly more favorable to Republican candidates. Louisiana's 2nd Congressional District, represented by Democratic Rep. Troy Carter, would remain a majority-Black district under the plan. But the net effect is stark: Louisiana's congressional delegation shifts from a 4-2 Republican majority to 5-1, the Washington Examiner reported.
The Louisiana Senate had already cleared the measure in a 27-10 vote. The House then amended the proposal and debated it for roughly seven hours before passing it. Nearly all House Democrats spoke in opposition.
The bill now heads to Landry's desk. No one expects a veto. The governor had already suspended the state's scheduled May 16 U.S. House primaries to give the legislature time to redraw districts ahead of the June 1 end of session.
Lawmakers moved to reschedule the primaries for Nov. 3, shifting Louisiana back to a jungle primary system in which all candidates compete on a single ballot. Any necessary runoffs are set for Dec. 12.
The redistricting push followed a Supreme Court decision that found Louisiana's existing map unconstitutional. The Court concluded that state lawmakers had leaned too heavily on racial considerations when drawing the 6th Congressional District, a finding that reshaped the 2026 House map in Republicans' favor overnight.
The ruling drew fierce criticism from Democrats and progressive commentators who characterized it as a rollback of Voting Rights Act protections. Former President Obama and former Democratic strategist Donna Brazile were among the most vocal critics, with Brazile going so far as to accuse the Court of reviving Jim Crow.
But the Court's majority was clear: race cannot be the predominant factor in drawing district lines. That principle forced Louisiana's hand.
The decision was fast-tracked by the justices, who moved with unusual speed to ensure the ruling could take effect before the 2026 election cycle. Justice Samuel Alito wrote pointedly in response to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's lone dissent, as the Court cleared the way for a new congressional map.
Opposition to the new map did not come only from Democrats. Rep. Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican, took to social media to criticize the revised boundaries, calling the plan "the worst I've seen yet" and describing it as a "Frankenstein" map.
Higgins did not elaborate publicly on which specific boundary changes drew his ire, and no other Republican lawmakers were quoted in opposition. But his objection underscores the reality that redistricting fights rarely break along clean partisan lines, even when the outcome benefits one party on paper.
Still, the broader political math is plain. Just The News reported that the redraw is expected to produce five Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning seat, giving Republicans a net gain of one House seat.
Louisiana is far from alone. Congressional redistricting battles are unfolding across the country ahead of the 2026 midterms, with Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, South Carolina, and Virginia all engaged in their own map-drawing disputes.
Each state presents its own legal and political dynamics, but the Louisiana case carries outsized weight. The Supreme Court's ruling did not merely affect one state's map, it reset the legal framework governing how race may factor into redistricting nationwide. Legislators in other states are now operating under a tighter standard, one that limits the degree to which racial demographics can drive district boundaries.
For Democrats, the Louisiana outcome represents a concrete loss. The party's House caucus will almost certainly lose a seat in a state where it already held a minority position. Rep. Fields' 6th District, once drawn as a majority-Black seat, will now tilt Republican. That is a direct consequence of the Court's finding that the old map was racially gerrymandered, a term Democrats rarely apply when the gerrymandering benefits their own coalition.
The reaction from national Democratic figures was swift and predictable. But the legal ground beneath their argument has shifted. The Supreme Court said race was the predominant factor in drawing the old 6th District. That is not a close call. It is a constitutional violation.
Gov. Landry's signature will make the new map law, locking in Louisiana's congressional boundaries for the 2026 cycle. The jungle primary on Nov. 3 will be the first election held under the redrawn lines.
Whether legal challenges follow remains an open question. The specific bill number and detailed boundary descriptions have not been publicly detailed in full. And the demographic composition of the revised 6th District, the key question for any future Voting Rights Act challenge, has not been formally published.
But the political trajectory is clear. Louisiana's legislature acted within the bounds set by the Supreme Court, redrew its map, and did so with bipartisan opposition but majority support. The Senate vote was 27-10. The House debated for seven hours and passed it anyway.
Democrats can object to the outcome. They cannot credibly object to the process. The Supreme Court told Louisiana its old map was unconstitutional. Louisiana drew a new one. That is how the system is supposed to work, even when one side does not like the result.
