Ready to launch your business? Get started with the commerce platform made for entrepreneurs.

Shopify is specially designed to help you start, run and grow your business with easy customizable themes that let you build your brand,

marketing tools that get your products out there. Integrated shipping solutions that actually save you time.

From startups to scaleups, online, inperson and on the go. Shopify is made for

entrepreneurs like you. Sign up for your $1 teaches law at NYU in the University of Chicago.

He's at the Civitas Institute, University of Texas at Austin,

to comment on the Supreme Court decision these last days, a vote of six to three, struck down a

Louisiana congressional map that a group of voters who described themselves as non-African American,

that's a quote, had challenged as a product of unconstitutional, racial

gerrymandering. This is Louisiana versus Calais. 6 to 3. I note that there was a minority

opinion written by Justice Elena Kagan, but in her dissent, she commented that the majority opinion written by Justice Alito had rendered the provision of an exemption all but a dead letter.

Her exemption had to do with the expectation that it did not strike down a provision of the Federal Voting Rights Act, as the Louisiana Challenges had

originally asked.

So what we have here is Louisiana moving to redraw its congressional district map.

That is known generally for hundreds of years as gerrymandering.

Professor, a very good evening to you.

What I know about this case is that there are hard feelings.

Why? Good evening.

Well, we put ourselves in this perfect position where if you're on the losing side of any one of these Voting Act decisions,

you can call the other side racist or engaged in gerrymandering.

Because the question that you're supposed to decide under the modern version of

this act is how you draw the ideal set of districts. There's a fundamental theoretical problem

...