White House says Supreme Court ruling could give them up to 20 more seats

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller has said that Democrats could face a potential electoral wipeout if the Supreme Court removes a key part of the Voting Rights Act in an ongoing Louisiana case.

Miller wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “How many people just realized that Dems had as many as 20 extra seats based on years of unconstitutional race-based gerrymandering?”

Why It Matters

The Supreme Court heard Louisiana v. Callais on Wednesday, a case that could lead to the court striking down Section 2 in the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial gerrymandering when it dilutes minority votes.

Without the requirement to protect majority-minority districts, Republicans would have far greater freedom to redraw congressional maps in ways that dilute the voting power of Black and other minority communities—areas that tend to favor Democrats.

What To Know

The Louisiana case challenges the state’s 2024 congressional map, which created a second majority-Black district. Opponents argue that using race to draw districts in this way violates the Constitution, while supporters say it protects minority voting power.

Miller’s post responded to a New York Times map that showed one possible redistricting scenario which could see the Democrats losing nine seats through the loss of Section 2. 

He incorrectly suggested that the map, which depicted a hypothetical outcome, showed Democrats could lose 20 seats. 

However, other estimates, including one by Fair Fight Action and Black Voters Matter Fund, said Democrats could lose 19 seats if Section 2 were struck down.

If Republicans were able to aggressively redistrict without Section 2, they could eliminate enough Democratic-leaning districts to gain a significant structural advantage in the House. 

Voting rights advocates have warned that this could give the GOP a long-term advantage in the House, making it harder for Democrats to compete even in years when they win the national popular vote.

The case comes as President Donald Trump has urged Republicans to pursue mid-cycle redistricting.

What People Are Saying

Lauren Groh-Wargo, Fair Fight Action CEO, said in a statement: “This is about more than lines on a map—it could decide whether millions of Black, Latino, and other voters of color still have a voice in our representative democracy.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said about the Louisiana case: “This court’s cases, in a variety of contexts, have said that race-based remedies are permissible for a period of time—sometimes for a long period of time, decades in some cases—but that they should not be indefinite, and should have an end point.”

What Happens Next

A decision in Louisiana v. Callais is likely to come next summer. This may come after several state primaries, meaning it may not affect the next midterms and its full impact could take years to play out.