Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito authored the opinion in Louisiana v. Callais, which significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act. The opinion contained a major statistical error that undermined a key part of the legal analysis supporting the decision.
Latest development
Media Coverage · May 8, 2026
The court issued a written opinion.
newspaper Read articleCourt
Court not identified
Awaiting court metadata
Docket
Not captured
Appellate
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
Supreme Court gutted Voting Rights Act based on bullsh - t data
Media Coverage · May 08, 2026
Coverage
1 article
1 source tracked
Participants
1 Government Agency, 1 Presiding Judge
2 linked entities
Judge
Neil Gorsuch
The court metadata has not been resolved yet, so Juryvine is keeping the page conservative until a reliable court match lands.
The newest docket activity we have is a media coverage dated May 08, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Neil Gorsuch and others.
Press monitoring has found 1 related article from 1 distinct source.
What should be an impossible occurrence has now become routine. The conservatives on the nation’s highest court continue to undermine democracy and the Constitution—and if they have to lie to do it, so be it. So perhaps we shouldn’t be all that surprised to learn that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in Louisiana v. Callais, in which he blithely destroyed the Voting Rights Act, had a major statistical error at the heart of it that undermines a big part of his analysis.
Open original open_in_newJuryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.
The court issued a written opinion.
What should be an impossible occurrence has now become routine. The conservatives on the nation’s highest court continue to undermine democracy and the Constitution—and if they have to lie to …
Sources tracked
1 outlet · 1 article
Timeline events
1 record on file
Last updated
1 day, 13 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.