Experts argue the Supreme Court abandoned its principles

Election law experts and liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argue the Supreme Court's conservative majority is selectively applying the Purcell principle to aid Republican gerrymandering efforts.

The Purcell principle was first articulated in the 2006 case Purcell vs. González, and it limits election changes close to voting.

After criticizing lower courts for interfering in elections, the Court allowed Texas's gerrymandered map and fast-tracked Louisiana's redistricting despite ongoing voting. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's opposition highlighted the hypocrisy: the Court abandoned its own standard, adding, "And just like that, those principles give way to power.”

Southern states including Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Tennessee are racing to redraw maps eliminating majority-Black districts. Election law experts argue the Court created "perverse incentives" encouraging last-minute changes.

Law professor Mark Johnson stated the Court "acted like it doesn't exist."

The Court's actions threaten voting rights protections and have sparked criticism from legal scholars, who describe their actions as politically motivated.

A Pew Research Center survey found, between August 2020 and August 2025, public approval of the Supreme Court dropped to 48%.

Democrats are now calling for reform.

Watch the video below.

Your browser does not support the video tag.