In a perplexing turn of events, the U.S. Supreme Court has chosen not to intervene in the legal battle over Louisiana's new congressional map, adding another layer of uncertainty to the already complex Voting Rights Act case.

New Louisiana Congressional Map : Emergency Stay Denied

On Thursday, the highest court in the land made a surprising decision to decline two emergency stay applications regarding a Fifth Circuit panel's order to cancel a federal court hearing in Louisiana. The hearing was meant to address the alleged dilution of Black voters' influence in the state's new congressional map, but the panel's intervention has thrown a wrench into the proceedings.

 Controversial Panel Order

The emergency stay applications were submitted by the Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP and 13 individual voters who strongly objected to the Fifth Circuit panel's order. They argued that it constituted a "gross abuse" of the writ of mandamus process, essentially micromanaging a trial court's docket. Justice Samuel Alito referred these applications to the full court, ultimately resulting in the denial of the stay.

New Louisiana Congressional Map : A Solo Opinion

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson added her voice to the decision by writing a two-page solo concurring opinion. She explicitly expressed her disapproval of the Fifth Circuit panel's use of the writ of mandamus process in this case. However, Justice Jackson pointed out that the Louisiana Legislature had publicly stated that they wouldn't attempt to redraw the map while the litigation was ongoing. This declaration led her to believe that the Supreme Court's decision not to stay the circuit court's order wouldn't unduly delay the district court proceedings.

A Controversial 18-Page Opinion

The Fifth Circuit panel's 18-page opinion, issued on September 28, was a game-changer. It declared that a Middle District of Louisiana judge had been mistaken in denying Louisiana's request for a trial in the case and instead proceeding with a hearing to determine how to remedy the state's map, which had previously been deemed likely to violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

New Louisiana Congressional Map: The Timeline Unraveled

The case's perplexity arises from a complex timeline. In June 2022, Judge Shelly Deckert Dick granted Black voters' request for a preliminary injunction, preventing Louisiana from conducting congressional elections using the contested map. The judge gave lawmakers an opportunity to create a new map, but Louisiana chose to appeal the injunction.

After the Fifth Circuit panel unanimously denied the state's stay request, Louisiana turned to the Supreme Court. In June 2022, the Supreme Court agreed to stay the injunction and ordered that the case be held in abeyance until it decided the outcome of the Alabama case.

Once the Alabama case was decided in June, the Supreme Court dismissed Louisiana's petition for review and handed the issue back to the Fifth Circuit while retaining the preliminary injunction.

 A Fight Over Timing

In August, Louisiana asked Judge Dick to cancel the court's October 3-5 hearing and schedule a trial in the case. However, Judge Dick rejected the request, citing extensive prior litigation and substantial preparation for the hearing.

Louisiana then sought writ of mandamus relief from the Fifth Circuit, leading to the current legal quagmire.

Dueling Perspectives

The Supreme Court filings by the voters contended that the Fifth Circuit panel's order should have been stayed, as it represented an improper attempt to "jump the line" and decide an issue that squarely fell under the jurisdiction of a separate appellate panel that heard oral arguments on October 6. According to the voters, the order introduced "unjustified and unnecessary delay" into the case.

Conversely, Louisiana argued that the circuit panel's order was necessary to prevent the case from descending into "procedural chaos," asserting that cancellation of the district court hearing protected the state's right to defend against voter dilution claims and ensured compliance with the Supreme Court's June ruling.

New Louisiana Congressional Map : Legal Representation

The group of voters led by Press Robinson and Edward Galmon Sr. is represented by a team of legal professionals from various firms and organizations.

• Stuart Naifeh, Leah C. Aden, Kathryn Sadasivan, Victoria Wenger, R. Jared Evans, and I. Sara Rohani of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc.
• Megan C. Keenan, Sarah Brannon, Dayton Campbell-Harris, and Sophia Lin Lakin of the ACLU Foundation.
• Nora Ahmed and Stephanie Willis of the ACLU of Louisiana.
• T. Alora Thomas-Lundborg of Harvard Law School's Election Law Clinic.
• Tracie Washington of the Louisiana Justice Institute.
• Robert A. Atkins, Yahonnes Cleary, Jonathan H. Hurwitz, Amitav Chakraborty, Adam P. Savitt, Arielle B. McTootle, and Robert Klein of Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison LLP.
• John Adcock.

The group led by Edward Galmon is represented by Abha Khanna, Jacob D. Shelly, Daniel Cohen, and Qizhou Ge of Elias Law Group LLP.

Louisiana is represented by Angelique Duhon Freel, Carey Tom Jones, and Jeffrey M. Wale of the Louisiana Department of Justice, as well as Jason B. Torchinsky, Phillip M. Gordon, and Edward M. Wenger of Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak PLLC.

Ardoin is represented by John C. Walsh of Shows Cali & Walsh LLP and Phillip J. Scratch, Thomas A. Farr, and Alyssa M. Riggins of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP.

In a case marked by complexity and legal twists, the fate of the New Louisiana Congressional Map remains uncertain, with the Supreme Court's refusal to stay the panel's order adding yet another layer of perplexity to this unfolding saga.