DOJ Vows To Crack Down On Racial Gerrymandering

As AMAC Newsline recently reported, the Supreme Court has handed down a landmark ruling in Louisiana v. Callais that effectively declares racial gerrymandering unconstitutional. The Democrats had abused Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), insisting that it allowed them to draw majority-minority congressional districts in which it was all but impossible for Republicans to win. The Court ruled that this was an impermissible application of Section 2, and the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) has pledged to aggressively enforce the ruling.

Just The News reports, “United States Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said Thursday that the Justice Department will enforce the Supreme Court’s decision on racially gerrymandering districts in every state that has such a district.”

This will be no small undertaking, however. Ballotpedia, analyzing data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2024 American Community Survey, estimates that majority-minority districts account for more than half (122 of 212) of the Democrat-controlled seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

It is, of course, probable that some of these districts just happen to be racially lopsided. In fact, according to Ballotpedia, there are 26 majority-minority House districts held by Republicans, about 11 percent of their 218 seats. But more than 57 percent of the Democrat House Caucus consists of majority-minority districts. It is simply not plausible that this percentage would be so high unless there is some skullduggery involved—namely racial gerrymandering. Immigration expert Alicia Nieves explains at UnHerd how the game has worked in recent decades:

“Democrat-aligned law firms led by the Elias Law Group… turned to a 1986 Supreme Court precedent to advance the theory that Section 2 requires the creation of majority-minority districts wherever the demographic math could be made to support one… The targets expanded with each cycle: first majority-black districts, then majority-Latino, then Native American, and, most ambitiously, ‘coalition districts’ combining black, Latino, and Asian voters into a single legally protected class.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais put a stop to this perversion of the VRA. As the opinion’s author, Justice Samuel Alito, phrased it on page 6: “Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act… was designed to enforce the Constitution—not collide with it.” In other words, the VRA explicitly prohibits “voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race.” The effect of this Supreme Court ruling is that the 28 states that have majority-minority district maps will probably be forced to revisit and redraw some portion of their congressional maps.

The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Eric Schmitt (R-MO), wrote a letter to the DOJ urging expeditious action on the Supreme Court’s ruling: “The Civil Rights Division has participated in, monitored, or influenced redistricting litigation for years. It should therefore identify the universe of districts created, preserved, or defended under the old Section 2 regime and determine whether they survive Callais.” Assistant Attorney General Dhillon responded, “Senator—we are ON IT!”

This inevitably produced all manner of attacks on Dhillon from Democrats and the corporate news media, who have been denouncing her from the moment she was nominated to head the Civil Rights Division. The general accusation is that, since taking over the division, she has actually worked to roll back voting rights. For example, she was accused of “providing cover” for congressional redistricting by Texas in 2025. This is a reference to a letter she wrote to Texas Governor Greg Abbott advising him that four of the state’s districts were unconstitutionally drawn:

“This letter will serve as formal notice by the Department of Justice to the State of Texas of serious concerns regarding the legality of four of Texas’s congressional districts. As stated below, Congressional Districts TX-9, TX-18, TX-29 and TX-33 currently constitute unconstitutional ‘coalition districts’ and we urge the State of Texas to rectify these race-based considerations from these specific districts… It is well-established that so-called ‘coalition districts’ run afoul of the Voting Rights Act.”

This doesn’t read like it was composed by someone trying to provide cover for Texas or trying to roll back voting rights, but the letter has routinely been provided as proof that Dhillon is guilty of both. Likewise, her willingness to enforce the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais is another black mark on her name, according to the Democrats. Democracy Docket, a newsletter produced by the above-noted Elias Law Group, brays: “The Trump administration confirmed Friday it will target Black and Latino-majority voting districts across the country.”

How did the administration supposedly confirm that? “Harmeet Dhillon made clear the Justice Department plans to go after ‘majority-minority’ districts—where Black and Latino voters are a majority of the population and have historically been able to elect candidates of their choice.”

In reality, of course, Dhillon and the DOJ aren’t going after “black” or “Latino” districts – they are going after districts that are unconstitutionally racially gerrymandered. Dhillon would be equally justified in going after districts drawn specifically to group together white voters, if any existed.

The reality is that Democrats don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to racial gerrymandering. They took a law passed to combat discrimination and used it to construct an entirely new – and similarly egregious – discriminatory regime that favored voters loyal to them.

That is why the DOJ is planning to vigorously enforce Louisiana v. Callais – and why it is completely justified in doing so.

David Catron is a Senior Editor at the American Spectator. His writing has also appeared in PJ Media, the American Thinker, the Providence Journal, the Catholic Exchange and a variety of other publications.