Dems Melt Down After SCOTUS Guts Racial Gerrymandering
The article argues that in **Louisiana v. Callais**, the U.S. Supreme Court moved toward a more “colorblind” approach to redistricting by sharply limiting states’ ability to rely on race when drawing political maps. It claims the ruling lets Republican-led states remove earlier “majority-minority” district configurations that had been justified under past interpretations of **Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act**.
It then describes widespread backlash from Democrats and corporate media figures, portraying their reactions as exaggerated. The piece cites statements from figures such as **Jaime Harrison, Chuck Schumer, Raphael Warnock, Hank Johnson,** and **J.B.Pritzker**, along with media commentary from outlets including **CNN, ABC,** and **MSNBC**, asserting that they claimed the decision would effectively revive “Jim Crow,” suppress Black or brown voters, or hinder political participation.The article frames these criticisms as unfounded and argues the decision instead represents an betterment for rule-of-law and constitutionality in redistricting.
The U.S. Supreme Court took a major step on Wednesday in upholding a colorblind Constitution — and predictably, the race-obsessed left is losing its marbles.
In its Louisiana v. Callais decision, the high court severely gutted states’ ability to use race in the redistricting process. The ruling essentially gives Republican-controlled states the green light to eliminate majority-minority districts that were carved out under past interpretations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — interpretations that benefited Democrats.
“If nothing else, the Louisiana v. Callais decision demonstrates just how much Democrat Party power in America has become an artificial construct. They gain power through counting illegals in the census, diluting election security rules, and forcing Red States to draw congressional districts solely on the basis of race,” former Trump administration official Theo Wold summarized on X. “They have no ability to argue their positions on the merits, so they’ve built these pillars of power to rig the game. But now they’re slowly coming to an end.”
Wold’s conclusion is clearly one shared by many Democrats and corporate media content creators. Since its release, these leftists have been in full freak-out mode about the consequences the Callais decision may have on their political power.
Former Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison set the bar pretty high with his outlandish post dubbing the current Supreme Court as “the worst … in American history.” He put the cherry on top by arguing that the current court is “worse than the Taney Court. Full stop.”
For historical context, the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roger Taney delivered the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) decision, in which the court ruled that black Americans — whether free or enslaved — were not U.S. citizens. The ruling also precluded Congress from banning slavery in federal territories.
Keeping in line with Harrison’s race-baiting idiocy, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ran to the Senate floor to grossly claim that, by taking a race-neutral approach in Callais, the Supreme Court “took another step towards resurrecting the Jim Crow South.”
Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., employed a similar talking point by claiming that “Trump’s Supreme Court is dragging us back to the dark and ugly days of Jim Crow.”
Democrat Senator Raphael Warnock — who perpetuated the “Jim Crow” lie about Georgia’s voting laws — now says the Supreme Court striking down unconstitutional racist gerrymandering is “Jim Crow in new clothes.”
No one is buying this. pic.twitter.com/sokmBIUe5P
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 30, 2026
“Today’s throwback decision legalizes Jim Crow 2.0, and is a devastating blow to the voting rights of Black people, and to American democracy itself,” wrote Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., who once expressed concerns that the island of Guam would “capsize” if too many people were on it.
Wannabe president and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker laughably claimed on X that the Callais decision is “voter suppression that will silence Black and brown voters.”
“Every American deserves an equal vote,” wrote the Democrat governor who runs “arguably the most gerrymandered state” in the country.
Democrats’ media allies also threw their bizarre hot takes into the mix.
While assessing Wednesday’s decision, CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic claimed that “it matters for Donald Trump’s own agenda, in terms of diminishing the ability to vote and go to the polls.” She also seemingly attempted to invent a bogus controversy by tying the conservative justices’ attendance at Tuesday’s White House state dinner for King Charles III to the Callais decision.
“And, coincidentally, just as an aside, those six conservatives were the six who were invited to Donald Trump’s dinner last night, not with the three liberals,” Biskupic said.
Newsbusters Manging Editor Curtis Houck reported similar unhinged commentary on MS NOW and ABC News.
As described by Houck, MS NOW “had senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin lead off by complaining congressional lines could now ‘be drawn in a way that disperses the votes of African Americans in the state of Louisiana, such that their voices will not be heard in the way that we have traditionally understood the Voting Rights Act to support.’” Meanwhile, ABC News correspondent Devin Dwyer “bemoaned the ‘setback for the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was passed to guarantee equality in how we vote’ and fight ‘systemic and historic racial discrimination’ as if to suggest those things are returning to America.”
The Newsbusters manging editor documented other insane legacy media reactions to the Supreme Court’s decision.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He is a co-recipient of the 2025 Dao Prize for Excellence in Investigative Journalism. His work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics and RealClearHealth. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
