U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Congressional District

What Happened?

In the case of Louisiana v Callais, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down one of Louisiana’s majority black congressional districts, ruling that the creation of the district was unconstitutional gerrymandering. Writing for the majority of the six-to-three decision, Justice Alito said that the Louisiana map was ‘an unconstitutional gerrymander, and its use would violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.’

Writing for the minority, Justice Kagan said ‘Under the Court’s new view a state can, without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power.’ Louisiana’s Governor announced a plan to delay the primary elections in the state so that the legislature could redraw Congressional districts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. 

Why it Matters

The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v Callais will likely change the way section two of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is applied. Section two of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is a provision that outlawed discrimination in voting based on race and has been interpreted to allow the use of racial demographic data in redistricting in order to protect the voting power of minorities. The new ruling narrows the scope of section two. 

Google just lost a $100 billion antitrust case. Here's who benefits.

A federal judge just ruled that Google illegally monopolized the online advertising market.

The DOJ wants a breakup.

If it happens, billions of dollars in digital ad spend will need somewhere new to go.

That's a problem for Google. But it's a tailwind for platforms that already sit between brands and consumers.

Platforms like Mode Mobile.

Mode built a software layer called EarnOS that pays users for everyday phone activity — browsing, music, games, charging. Brands pay Mode for the engagement. Mode shares the revenue with users.

It's a closed loop. And it works without Google's ad infrastructure.

$115M+ in revenue. $11.8M EBITDA in 2025. 490M+ users across 170 countries. Monthly profitability since April 2025.

Deloitte ranked them the #1 fastest-growing software company in North America. 32,481% over three years.

They've reserved $MODE on the Nasdaq.

Pre-IPO shares are still $0.50. Up to 20% bonus for early investors.

The ad economy is getting reshuffled. Mode is already positioned on the other side of it.*

Get the details here.

Prior to the 1965 law, southern states frequently drew congressional districts in such a way as to avoid having any districts that were predominantly black. Populated areas with black majorities in the south were often splintered in district maps to prevent any districts from having black Congressional representatives. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibited that practice, but some states went a step further.

Where southern states prior to 1965 used to draw congressional districts to have no black majorities, after the 1965 law, some states in the south designed congressional districts specifically to create black majorities. One such district was the one in question for the Louisiana case, and that congressional district zigzagged across the state in such a way to maximize the number of black voters within it.

Oddly shaped congressional districts are common in nearly every state, but in this case, the plaintiff’s argued that race was the driving factor for the district’s boundaries and the Supreme Court’s majority agreed.

The U.S. Constitution requires Congressional elections every two years, but exactly how those elections will be conducted, which includes the shape of congressional districts, is left up to the states.

The Supreme Court majority found that the Voting Rights Act did not specifically require Louisiana to create a second majority-minority district, implying that minority groups should only be allowed to get one such district per state. That logic itself is contrary to the equal protection clause of the Constitution because if minorities can be limited to one district even though they have enough numbers for more, then they do not have equal protection of the laws. 

How it Affects You

Several states have undertaken redistricting efforts to help one political party or the other get as many Congressional seats as possible. Most of those efforts will likely not be felt until 2028 because the 2026 midterms are too close for those changes to be put into practice.

But Louisiana appears set to try to make changes that will be felt this year, and if they succeed, other states may follow suit. As a result, some Congressional districts may disappear while new ones are created, which could affect the balance of political power in Congress.

*Disclaimer: Please read the offering circular and related risks at invest.modemobile.com. This is a paid advertisement for Mode Mobile’s Regulation A+ Offering.

Mode Mobile recently received their ticker reservation with Nasdaq ($MODE), indicating an intent to IPO in the next 24 months. An intent to IPO is no guarantee that an actual IPO will occur.

The Deloitte rankings are based on submitted applications and public company database research, with winners selected based on their fiscal-year revenue growth percentage over a three-year period.

Mode cumulative revenue includes full year revenue of businesses acquired in 2025.

Mode 2025 EBITDA includes full year EBITDA of businesses acquired in 2025.