In a recent episode of the Touro Law Review podcast, Ruth Greenwood, Assistant Clinical Professor and Director of the Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School, shared deep insights into the evolving challenges of gerrymandering and its implications for the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

Gerrymandering, a practice dating back to 1812 and named after Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry, involves drawing electoral district boundaries to favor specific groups or parties. Greenwood detailed this manipulation from its origins to its current forms, where techniques like “packing” and “cracking” voters based on political affiliations are common.

The discussion also covered the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in *Rucho v. Common Cause*. In this landmark ruling, the Court deemed claims of partisan gerrymandering as non-justiciable, arguing that federal courts lack manageable standards to judge such cases. This decision, as Greenwood noted, pushes the resolution of gerrymandering issues back to the legislative branches, a move critiqued by Justice Elena Kagan in her dissent, stressing that it undermines the democratic principle that voters should choose their politicians, not the other way around.

Another focal point was the pending Supreme Court case, *Callais v. Landry*, which challenges whether efforts to comply with the VRA’s Section 2—aimed at preventing vote dilution among minorities—can result in unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. This case follows the 2020 census adjustments, wherein Louisiana was required to redraw its districts to reflect its one-third Black population proportionally, leading to contention over the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district.

Greenwood emphasized the importance of advocacy both within and outside the judicial system. Citing Michigan’s use of a ballot initiative to establish an independent redistricting commission, she highlighted the potential of such grassroots efforts to ensure fair political representation.

As the legal battles and discussions continue, the outcomes of these cases and initiatives will significantly shape the future of electoral fairness and the efficacy of the Voting Rights Act. The full conversation is available for deeper understanding, shedding light on these critical issues at a time when the integrity of democratic processes remains under scrutiny.