Louisiana v. Callais — When May a Map Consider Race? Redistricting | FULL Oral Argument (2025)

Full oral argument in Louisiana v. Callais, No. 24-109, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on October 15, 2025. Complete and unedited, with the official transcript as captions. The question: Louisiana enacted S.B. 8 after another court held that its prior congressional map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A three-judge court then enjoined S.B. 8 as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. After the first argument, the Court restored the appeals to the calendar and ordered briefing on an additional issue. For reargument, the Court additionally asked whether Louisiana’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. Arguing: • Janai Nelson, Counsel — for the Appellants Press Robinson, et al. J • Benjamin Aguiñaga, Solicitor General — for the Appellant Louisiana • Edward D. Greim, Counsel — for the Appellees • Hashim M. Mooppan, Principal Deputy Solicitor General — for the United States, amicus curiae supporting Appellees Decided April 29, 2026 · 6–3. Affirmed and remanded. Alito, J., joined by Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, JJ. Concurring: Thomas, J., joined by Gorsuch, J. Dissenting: Kagan, J., joined by Sotomayor and Jackson, JJ. 608 U. S. 85 (2026). This is the reargument heard October 15, 2025. The first argument, heard March 24, 2025, has its own complete video and transcript. CHAPTERS 0:00 Case called — Chief Justice Roberts · Opening — Janai Nelson · P. 4 4:46 Roberts: what Milligan decided · P. 8 13:08 Kavanaugh: race versus political aims · P. 16 19:08 Barrett: Congress's enforcement power · P. 21 31:53 Kagan: if Section 2 ceased to operate · P. 33 40:22 Barrett: the assumed compelling interest · P. 42 46:38 Opening — Benjamin Aguiñaga, for Appellant Louisiana · P. 48 48:01 Thomas: why Louisiana switched sides · P. 49 57:03 Thomas: Robinson's role in SB8 · P. 57 1:06:39 Kavanaugh: the government's approach · P. 68 1:15:20 Jackson: what Section 2 mandates · P. 77 1:19:35 Opening — Edward D. Greim, for Appellees · P. 82 1:22:42 Kagan: data or stereotyping? · P. 85 1:32:36 Kagan: effects and congressional power · P. 95 1:39:37 Opening — Hashim M. Mooppan, for United States, amicus · P. 102 1:40:41 Thomas: separating race and party · P. 103 1:46:40 Jackson: the constitutional problem · P. 110 1:59:28 Sotomayor: what remains of Section 2? · P. 124 2:11:24 Kavanaugh: what predominance means · P. 140 2:18:20 Barrett: clarify or modify Gingles? · P. 149 2:24:38 Rebuttal — Janai Nelson · P. 157 2:30:00 The case is submitted · P. 161 SOURCES • Transcript: supremecourt.gov, No. 24-109 (Official — Subject to Final Review) • Audio: supremecourt.gov, the Court's own recording of the argument • Opinion: 608 U. S. 85 (2026) — supremecourt.gov, the Court's slip opinion — https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions... Nothing here is edited, summarised or reconstructed. The Court bans cameras, so no video of this argument exists; this is the complete audio record as released. Every caption is the official transcript verbatim, with the transcript page shown on screen so any quote can be checked against the record. The Court revises what it publishes — argument transcripts carry “Official — Subject to Final Review” and slip opinions are reissued — and a decision arrives long after the argument. This description is updated as the record changes: the decision is added when it is handed down, and the citation gains its page number when the volume assigns one. The spoken text is never edited. #SCOTUS #SupremeCourt #Redistricting #SCOTUSNotice