Lt. Governor Burt Jones (R-GA) recently issued a statement in response to the United States Supreme Court ruling that Louisiana’s congressional map constitutes an “unconstitutional racial gerrymander.”
The Lt. Governor commended the Court’s decision, stating that no state should be instructed to draw race-based legislative maps in an egalitarian society.
Lt. Gov. Jones then turned his attention to the State of Georgia, elaborating on how it is well within its rights to redraw its maps in accordance with the Supreme Court.
“I commend the Supreme Court for its decision in the Louisiana redistricting case,” said Lt. Gov. Jones. “I agree that in a society built on the equal protection of law, no state should be directed to draw legislative maps on the basis of race."
He continued, “Given that Georgia was ordered to do so in its last round of redistricting, I fully support redrawing our state’s legislative maps in compliance with today’s decision.”
Lt. Governor Burt Jones Issues Statement on SCOTUS Redistricting Decision
“I commend the Supreme Court for its decision in the Louisiana redistricting case.
I agree that in a society built on the equal protection of law, no state should be directed to draw legislative maps on… pic.twitter.com/z7DUND3v1o
— Lt. Governor Burt Jones (@LtGovJonesGA) April 29, 2026
The Supreme Court Case
In striking down Louisiana's congressional map, the Court significantly redefined how the Voting Rights Act (VRA) can be interpreted through a constitutional lens. The Court essentially held that Louisiana's creation of a second majority-black district violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The state argued that it drew the district in compliance with Section Two of the VRA, but the Court contradicted this interpretation. According to the Court, the state had no 'compelling interest' to use race as the predominant factor in drawing the legislative map.
The decision of Louisiana v. Callais represents a major shift in the Court's approach to civil rights and redistricting. It goes against a decades-long assumption that complying with the VRA in this way representing a 'compelling interest.' Now, considering race is no longer strictly required when redistricting.
