$2.52K
1
10
$2.52K
1
10
Trader mode: Actionable analysis for identifying opportunities and edge
Before Aug 2026 If exactly X justices vote in favor of the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais, then the market resolves to Yes. X justice is counted as voting in favor of the petitioner only if, according to the Court's final action, that justice supported a judgment that grants some or all relief requested by the petitioner. The number of votes for the petitioner is the number of justices who concurred in a judgment of the Court in favor of the petitioner, or dissented from the judgment agains
Prediction markets currently assign a 73% probability that exactly six Supreme Court justices will vote in favor of former President Donald Trump in Trump v. Slaughter, the case concerning his removal from Colorado's ballot. This price, translating to a 73-cent cost for a "Yes" outcome on Kalshi, indicates the market views a 6-3 vote as the most likely single outcome. However, with only $4,000 in total volume across all vote-count markets, liquidity is thin, suggesting this consensus is not backed by heavy capital and remains sensitive to new information.
The pricing reflects a strategic reading of the Court's ideological composition and its recent hearing. The market is likely betting that the Court's conservative majority will rule for Trump, but that one or more conservative justices may seek a narrower, more unanimous or near-unanimous ruling to avoid the appearance of a purely partisan decision. The 6-3 spread specifically suggests the market expects the three liberal justices (Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson) to dissent, while the six conservative justices form the majority. This aligns with the skeptical questioning faced by the plaintiffs' attorneys during oral arguments, where even some liberal justices expressed concerns about the national implications of a single state's decision.
The primary catalyst will be the Court's final opinion and vote tally, expected by late June or early July 2024. A shift away from the 6-3 consensus could occur if a broader ruling, such as a 9-0 decision on procedural grounds, gains traction. Conversely, a narrower 5-4 ruling is possible if a conservative justice breaks ranks to uphold Colorado's authority under the 14th Amendment's Insurrection Clause. Any unexpected procedural developments or leaked drafts before the official release could cause immediate and volatile repricing in this low-liquidity market. The thin volume means even modest new bets can significantly move the current 73% probability.
AI-generated analysis based on market data. Not financial advice.
Louisiana v. Callais is a pending case before the United States Supreme Court that tests the constitutionality of Louisiana's congressional district map under the Voting Rights Act. The case specifically examines whether the map, drawn by the Louisiana legislature in 2022, unlawfully dilutes the voting power of Black residents by failing to create a second majority-Black congressional district. The petitioner, the State of Louisiana, is defending its map, while the respondents, a group of Black voters and civil rights organizations led by Callais, argue it violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court's decision, expected by June 2025, will determine the map for the 2026 congressional elections. This case is closely watched as it follows the Court's 2023 decision in Allen v. Milligan, which affirmed the use of Section 2 to challenge racially gerrymandered maps, and could signal whether the Court's conservative majority is shifting its approach to voting rights litigation. The prediction market focuses on forecasting the final vote count among the nine justices, a metric that reveals the Court's ideological alignment on this critical issue.
The legal battle over Louisiana's congressional districts is part of a decades-long struggle under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Section 2 of the Act, amended in 1982, prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. In the 1986 case Thornburg v. Gingles, the Supreme Court established a three-part test for proving vote dilution under Section 2, which remains the foundational standard. Louisiana has a long history of voting rights litigation. Following the 1990 census, the state was ordered to create a second majority-Black district, which it maintained until the 2010 redistricting cycle. After the 2020 census, Louisiana's population was approximately 33% Black, yet the legislature's enacted map in 2022 contained only one majority-Black district out of six, prompting the current lawsuit. This case arrives at the Supreme Court amidst a shifting legal landscape. In 2013, the Court's decision in Shelby County v. Holder effectively nullified Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which required certain states with histories of discrimination to obtain federal preclearance for voting changes. This placed greater emphasis on Section 2 litigation. The Court's 2023 decision in Allen v. Milligan, which upheld Section 2's application to Alabama's similar map, set a direct precedent for Louisiana's case, making the Court's willingness to follow its own recent ruling a central question.
The outcome of Louisiana v. Callais will have immediate and profound consequences for political representation in Louisiana and potentially nationwide. A ruling against the state would likely require the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district, which could shift one of Louisiana's six House seats from Republican to Democratic control, affecting the balance of power in the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives. This could influence which party controls the chamber after the 2026 elections. Beyond Louisiana, the decision will signal the Supreme Court's continued commitment to the Voting Rights Act's protections against racial gerrymandering. A ruling narrowing or overturning Section 2 precedents would empower Republican-led legislatures in other southern states to draw maps that minimize minority voting strength, potentially affecting districts in Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas. Such a decision could reshape the electoral landscape for a generation, influencing the composition of Congress and the Electoral College. For Black voters in Louisiana, the case represents a fundamental question of political power and access. The state has not had two Black-majority districts since the 1990s, despite its significant Black population. The decision will determine whether nearly one-third of Louisiana's citizens have electoral districts that reflect their community's interests and provide meaningful opportunities to elect candidates of their choice.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear Louisiana's appeal on September 29, 2023, consolidating it with a related case, Robinson v. Callais. Oral arguments were held on October 4, 2023, during which justices engaged in intense questioning about the applicability of the Milligan precedent and the proper standards for evaluating racial gerrymandering claims. The case is now under deliberation, with a decision expected by the end of the Court's current term in June 2025. In the interim, the 2022 map remains in effect for the 2024 elections due to the Supreme Court's earlier stay of the district court's injunction. The Court's composition has remained stable since the case was argued, with no justice recusals announced. Legal observers are closely analyzing the questions asked during oral arguments to predict the final vote count, with particular attention to Justice Kavanaugh's comments about stare decisis and Justice Barrett's questions about the Gingles test requirements.
Louisiana v. Callais is a Supreme Court case challenging whether Louisiana's congressional district map violates the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voting power. The state's map has one majority-Black district out of six, despite Black residents comprising about one-third of the population.
The Supreme Court will likely issue its decision by the end of its current term in June 2025. The case was argued in October 2023 and is now under deliberation by the nine justices.
Allen v. Milligan was a 2023 Supreme Court case where Alabama's similar congressional map was found to violate the Voting Rights Act. Louisiana's case tests whether the Court will apply the same precedent to a nearly identical factual situation in another southern state.
Educational content is AI-generated and sourced from Wikipedia. It should not be considered financial advice.
Share your predictions and analysis with other traders. Coming soon!
10 markets tracked
No data available
| Market | Platform | Price |
|---|---|---|
Will exactly 6 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 65% |
Will exactly 5 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 19% |
Will exactly 4 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 8% |
Will exactly 3 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 7% |
Will exactly 7 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 3% |
Will exactly 2 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 3% |
Will exactly 9 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 2% |
Will exactly 8 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 2% |
Will exactly 1 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 2% |
Will exactly 0 justices vote for the petitioner in Louisiana v. Callais? | Kalshi | 2% |
No related news found
Add this market to your website
<iframe src="https://predictpedia.com/embed/nCIKxC" width="400" height="160" frameborder="0" style="border-radius: 8px; max-width: 100%;" title="How many justices will vote for Louisiana in Louisiana v. Callais?"></iframe>