Louisiana’s new congressional districts are on the books. What happens next is a period of instability that may not clear up until the next census.

January’s special session jettisoned prior district boundaries that contained only one majority-minority district in favor of two, as a response to an adverse court decision based upon the outcome of the Allen v. Milligan U.S. Supreme Court ruling. The ensuing plan radically altered principally parts of the Fourth and Sixth Congressional Districts, with the latter giving up its reach from Baton Rouge to the coast by running up the Red River to take bites out of Lafayette, Alexandria and Shreveport, pushing a dagger into the Fourth and becoming M/M.

This almost assuredly will put Republican Rep. Garret Graves out of office later this year, with Democrat state Sen. Cleo Fields already having announced his candidacy for the slot; Graves is white while Fields is black. A congressman only has to live in the state in which he runs, not in a particular district, but Graves has little chance winning in any other district currently held by a Republican since his base still is in the Baton Rouge area.

Which won’t last long. While several maps were considered, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry and the GOP majority in the Legislature placed emphasis on protecting Republican Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise – the top two jobs among congressional Republicans and therefore in Congress as the GOP is the majority party. Had the Legislature not reapportioned in the special session, the district court dealing with the case could have imposed any of these that would have been less protective of the pair. One option in particular might have made Johnson’s Fourth District less secure.

Timing is everything in these matters, and had the state stuck to its guns with the recent single M/M district, the shifting legal processes might have locked it in for 2024, because of the judicial (Purcell) principle that courts won’t order changes to maps too close to an election. But had unpredictable legal processes worked out on a different timeline, possibly a court-drawn map instead would have been set in stone for this fall. Thus, Landry and GOP legislative leaders decided to pass the map most protective of the important Republican leaders (who represent the first time in American history one state has had the top two leadership positions in the House), even if it meant losing the possibility that perfectly defensible maps would remain in pace, to avoid having a court willing to rush a preferred map into place as quickly as possible.

The problem that resulted is the map constitutionally is questionable. Three decades ago, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out as racially gerrymandered a similar map, with the only real difference being that it was drawn for seven districts. Chances are pretty good this will happen again; even now, the state is being scoured for citizens in the Sixth District who are willing to challenge the new map.

Even if that case were filed tomorrow, the principle would prevent 2024 from using anything but the new boundaries. But by 2026, it’s at least even money that some case somewhere will have been heard by the Supreme Court and have considered as part of it the Assoc. Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurrence in Allen v. Milligan that would end the preferred place race has in reapportionment decisions, and produce a decision ending that preference. It might even be part of a challenge to the new map, or perhaps part of the Nairne v. Ardoin case brought against Louisiana’s legislative plans.

That means if Fields were to win, he could spend a second short stint in Washington, three decades after his first (the district declared unconstitutional like the present one actually was a second try after the district in which Fields was elected was declared unconstitutional – eventually, a far more race-neutral court-drawn plan after the two rejections ensured Fields would not return). But then the state could revert back to something similar as to what it just chucked in time for 2026, or 2028 if things move slowly.

However, although much less likely, the Court could go ahead and declare the new map invalid but disregard the Kavanaugh concurrence, which would mean another go at reapportionment in 2026 or later. This is realistic only if a significant shift in Court membership occurred among the five conservative associate justices.

Of course, eventually all of this could be disrupted if population trends don’t work in the state’s favor. By 2032, Louisiana may lose another House seat, and then it all become a moot point; absent some unanticipated resurrection of the notion of retrogression – paring of M/M seats – that largely has fallen into disfavor since the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder Court decision, the state’s population distribution simply couldn’t support two of five M/M districts.

To make a long story short, nothing is settled. Almost certainly the state will operate a two M/M map for this fall’s election, but there’s a good chance that things will reset in 2026 to something like they were in 2022. Whoever wins the Sixth this year should be prepared to expect a short stay in D.C.