23 Oct 2025 Realigning the Voting Rights Act Would Preserve the VRA’s Legacy

The U.S. Supreme Court is reexamining the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 — especially Section 2, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race.  Louisiana v. Callais questions whether the creation of a second majority-black congressional district in Louisiana amounts to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Ambassadors with the Project 21 black leadership network are weighing in on the case.

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Curtis Hill, Project 21 ambassador and former Indiana Attorney General:

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a crucial safeguard for ensuring all Americans can vote without discrimination, but its current interpretation of Section 2, which mandates race-conscious redistricting to create majority-minority districts, conflicts with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by fostering racial preferences and divisions. This approach relies on stereotypes about minority voting preferences and has failed to eliminate persistent disparities despite decades of implementation, instead creating resentment and an “inequality of equality.”

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices are justified in questioning race-based remedies, advocating for a time-limited or eliminated use of race in redistricting to align with the Constitution’s colorblind ideal. By shifting to race-neutral methods that focus on socioeconomic or community factors, states can protect voting rights universally while allowing democratic market forces to address biases naturally.

Ultimately, this realignment honors the VRA’s legacy by promoting a clear, fair standard of equality for every citizen.

 

Horace Cooper

Horace Cooper, Project 21 chairman, legal commentator and a senior fellow with the National Center for Public Policy Research:

The Voting Rights Act was passed to ensure that black Americans, like all other Americans, have the right to vote. When local jurisdictions and even some states actively worked to prevent black Americans from voting, a drastic remedy was adopted — so-called majority-minority elected districts were created. These districts, both state and federal, were a crude way to prevent minority voters from being denied voting opportunities.

Over time this crude remedy became the primary tool used whenever voting rights claims were made, even without any real showing that the voting rights of blacks or other Americans had been violated.

Gone are the days when blacks couldn’t safely access the ballot box or hold political office, yet this crude remedy remains with us today.

Today more black Americans intermarry, are raised in interracial households and live in multiracial jurisdictions; this makes a blunt instrument like race-based electoral districts impractical. Furthermore, these race-based districts have now created a voting situation more akin to the pre-Civil-Rights era that America rejects.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will agree that these bygone-era judicial remedies are no longer viable nor constitutional.

Linda Lee Tarver

Dr. Linda Lee Tarver, Project 21 ambassador, former Michigan Civil Rights Commissioner and election integrity expert:

“We shall overcome” is part of a hymn that sustained our black ancestors during the Civil Rights Era. The Voting Rights Act was established during this era to right wrongs, to give equal rights to vote and to provide the opportunity for our ancestors to choose their representation in elected positions throughout our government.

It is vitally important for us to know if we, as black people, have actually “overcome.” I posit that we have indeed overcome in the area of race-conscious redistricting, required by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Black families were once redlined. Redlining is a discriminatory practice of denying financial services, like mortgages and insurance, to residents of certain neighborhoods due to their race or ethnicity. The term originated from the color-coded maps used by the U.S. government in the 1930s, on which red lines were drawn around predominantly minority neighborhoods, marking them as high-risk and deterring lenders from investing there. Blacks were also prohibited from purchasing land and residential properties outside of the government red lines until this practice was declared illegal in 1968.

In 2025, black people are able to purchase land and homes in any neighborhood. The idea of black neighborhoods and black communities is a personal choice by black residents, not a discriminatory government mandate.

We black people are now free! Like the Obamas, we are free to live on Martha’s Vineyard or in Detroit or in Atlanta. Because “we have overcome” in the areas of housing and community, race-conscious redistricting now violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and the 15th Amendment.

Michigan is the prime example of the insignificance of racial redistricting afforded under the Voting Rights Act. Detroit is 78-80% African-American yet its mayor is a white man named Mike Duggan. Michigan’s governor, attorney general and secretary of state are all white women who were elected primarily through the votes in predominately black Detroit.

In my opinion, the Voting Rights Act has fulfilled, and thereby outlived, its purpose. We have overcome racial set-asides and redistricting!

Melanie Collette

Melanie Collette, Project 21 ambassador:

I deeply appreciate the Voting Rights Act’s legacy of expanding voting access for all. For that legacy to continue in its purest form, the Supreme Court must recognize the individuality of black voters and reject policies that group them together.

The VRA was designed to remove obstacles, not to enforce rigid racial stereotypes. Redistricting should embrace the principles of Equal Protection using race-neutral criteria that celebrate our diversity. Every vote deserves equal value, free from racial assumptions, ensuring genuine fair representation and that every citizen is heard and respected.

 

Richard Holt

Richard Holt, Project 21 ambassador and political consultant:

Democracy functions best when districts reflect the full diversity of American life.

Packing minority voters into single districts silences their influence elsewhere and promotes outdated racial stereotypes. Black Americans, like all citizens, hold a wide range of political views.

A more integrated district structure would strengthen representation by ensuring multiple members of Congress are accountable to these communities. After all, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever” has become a feature of failure. Why are we so eager to bring it back?

Terris Todd

Terris Todd, Project 21’s director of coalitions and outreach:

There was a time in our nation’s history when black Americans could not vote. There was a time when black Americans could not live freely in areas of their choosing. There was a time when black Americans could not run for political office. There was a time when black Americans could not read or write or attend the best schools to compete alongside their white counterparts. There was a time when black Americans could not own their homes or businesses, and so on.

Today, if we are honest with ourselves, our nation and people have taken leaps of faith and progress towards creating “a more perfect union” amongst ourselves. However, some refuse to acknowledge this truth because they would rather stay in a low place of isolation from the real world of freedom.

The Voting Rights Act has fulfilled its purpose during its time. To claim that we somehow still need this Act, when the American people have proven otherwise, is to confess that the condition of one’s heart is still not healed nor free.

Brandon Brice

Brandon Brice, Project 21 ambassador:

Voting and gerrymandering should always be based on the power of ideas, and not based on race, gender or religion. Representation matters when it comes to ideals, values and perspectives, not just when it comes to race.

In fact, history has shown that voting and elections based on race have often led to issues not fully being addressed — issues such as education, poverty and public safety. Voters deserve quality, not just groupthink.

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg once spoke out against discrimination on the basis of sex and gender. I believe the same should apply when examining how race plays into our electoral process.