The Absolute damn that is not Given, since before the infamous project2025
Immediately and instantly, the process to dismantle humanity's Human Rights gains were ongoing 1877 to 1896 and continued in perpetuity.
The court will hold a hearing starting June 17, 2026, at 10 a.m.at the federal courthouse in Shreveport (300 Fannin Street). The hearing is scheduled to take place before U.S. Circuit Judge Carl E. Stewart, Judge David C. Joseph, and Judge Robert R. Summerhays. The court said proceedings may last on June 18, 2026, if necessary.
*The entire society in Louisiana is disturbingly uneasy about the future of justice and confidence in the same. Shall the 'democratic republic' be dissolved as unfunctional.
Other Issues creating apathy abound
Furthermore, the effort to invoke fear into voters, voters' registrations and such is intimidating too many unfamiliar with their rights as voters.
Who is Black? In Louisiana, there's a lot at stake in how that's answered
As the midterm elections approached, part of the argument that drew national attention to both cases was the standard of “blackness” or who gets to identify as “Black.”
In “Robinson v Ardoin,” Attorney General Jeff Landry argues for a narrower definition of "Black" and how that "definition" can be used in Section 2 Voting Rights cases.
In court documents, Landry advocates the use of what he calls "DOJ Black," namely, "those who are 'Black' and those who are 'Black and White.'"
“Our argument to the court is anyone who checks black should be identified as black in terms of drawing a new map,” Evans said. “The argument of the Secretary of State and the Attorney General is that it’s too broad of a definition that you cannot be considered black unless that is your only race.”
And furtherly:
The Louisiana case, propelled by plaintiffs including one man who didn’t realize he was involved, could reshape the balance between the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution’s promise of equal protection.
Yet the lawsuit’s origins—including one plaintiff, Albert "Skip” Caissie Jr., who told reporters he hadn’t realized he was part of the case—highlight how these consequential legal battles often begin quietly, driven more by advocacy lawyers than by citizens who feel directly harmed.
What To Know
Caissie’s Story
When Albert "Skip” Caissie Jr. answered his phone at his home outside Baton Rouge, he did not realize he was speaking about a Supreme Court case that now bears his name.
"I wasn’t aware that I was involved in a Supreme Court case,” the 78-year-old said in an interview with The New York Times.
A retired grocery-sales worker and Coast Guard Reserve veteran, Caissie speculated that he might once have responded to "a direct mail piece” about challenging Louisiana’s congressional map.
Still, he said he supported the lawsuit’s purpose and hoped the long-debated need for majority-minority districts was "something in the past.”
The Case Behind Caissie’s Name
Caissie is one of twelve Louisianans listed as plaintiffs in Callais v. Landry, the case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Their suit argues that the state legislature’s 2024 redistricting plan—Senate Bill 8, known as SB 8—constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The twelve plaintiffs listed in the official complaint (Phillip Callais et al. v. Nancy Landry, Case No. 3:24-cv-00122, W.D. La.), besides Albert "Skip” Caissie Jr., are:
- Phillip "Bert” Callais—the lead plaintiff, a veteran and former local election supervisor near Baton Rouge.
- Lloyd Price—identified as a resident voter; limited additional public information.
- Bruce Odell—no biographical details provided.
- Elizabeth Ersoff—listed as a Louisiana resident; previously appeared in local political activities, per public records.
- Daniel (Danny) Weir Jr.—limited information available.
- Joyce LaCour—identified as a local resident voter, no testimony or media presence.
- Candy Carroll Peavy—known locally for political activism and participation in conservative groups.
- Tanya Whitney—a member of "Trumpettes USA,” mentioned in The New York Times report.
- Mike Johnson (not House Speaker)—identified in filings simply as a Louisiana voter.
- Grover Joseph Rees—a former U.S. ambassador and longtime conservative legal figure.
- Rolfe McCollister—a Baton Rouge businessman and publisher, formerly associated with Business Report magazine.
Their limited public presence and lack of courtroom participation emphasize how major constitutional test cases are often lawyer-driven rather than plaintiff-driven, a central theme highlighted by the court itself.
From Hays to the High Court
The case has already produced a detailed record in the lower courts.
In April 2024, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana concluded that "District 6 of SB 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause” and barred the state "from using SB 8 in any future elections.”
Within days of SB 8’s passage, Caissie and the other plaintiffs—described in filings as "non-African-American voters”—filed their suit.
Their attorney, Paul Loy Hurd of Monroe, Louisiana, has been involved in redistricting litigation for decades.
In testimony before state lawmakers on January 18, 2024, Hurd urged them to reject SB 8, calling it "a racial gerrymander” and telling legislators: "I have never represented anyone but voters. I believe in compact, contiguous districts for white, Black, [and] Asian voters that live together, work together, go to school together.”
None of the twelve plaintiffs testified during the three-day federal trial in April, according to the official transcript.
Court documents list their names but provide no personal details beyond the claim that each "suffered unlawful, intentional discrimination based on race.”
The limited public profile of the plaintiffs highlights how modern constitutional test cases are often organized by lawyers or advocacy groups seeking a particular ruling.
Similar strategies have guided landmark civil-rights and social-policy cases for decades, but the anonymity of the Callais plaintiffs stands out.
Phillip "Bert” Callais, the lead plaintiff, testified before Louisiana’s House and Governmental Affairs Committee during the 2024 redistricting session, acknowledging the state’s history of segregation but warned legislators that creating two majority-Black districts could amount to "another type of segregation based on race.”
The Supreme Court will now decide whether Louisiana’s effort to add a second majority-Black district—intended to comply with the Voting Rights Act—crossed the constitutional line by making race the dominant factor in drawing district boundaries.
The state and its Secretary of State, Nancy Landry, argue that the legislature acted lawfully in response to earlier federal orders requiring better representation for Black voters.
Back to Caissie
For Caissie, who said he had no idea he was part of the challenge until reporters contacted him, the principle remains simple. "We’re supposed to respect everyone for who they are,” he said.
Yet his unplanned role in a major case underscores a broader question about how ordinary citizens become symbolic litigants in disputes that may redefine the nation’s voting-rights landscape.
Plaintiff in Major Supreme Court Case Unaware He Was Involved - Newsweek
Supreme Court permits Alabama to use congressional map struck by lower court as racially discriminatory | SCOTUSblog
Deuel Ross, the director of litigation for the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, which represented one set of challengers in the dispute, criticized Tuesday’s order. In his statement, Ross said that the order “gives cover to Alabama and others to deliberately and openly discriminate against Black voters without fear of any consequence” and “defies any thoughtful or consistent application of the law.”
Tennessee Williams' 'Streetcar' and Harper Lee's 'To Kill a Mockingbird' is for some reason running around in all of this. It is no doubt Louisiana's love story and hateful history of black folks, all the while severely needing "colored people" of every hue to be the banana republic that it is, and is now raised its vulgar head for the whole of society to see. France, Germany, China, South Africa, Australia, Jordan and Egypt all have buggedout eyes of what's going on in Dixie.
Two-hundred and fifty years later, the nastiness of the United States is in all of our faces again. Royal Street is no doubt roiled itself, with the goings on, even after "the water should have washed away such depravity.
Code Noir is in full effect.
The 'Dixiefication' of the United States under Donald John Trump originally got its start under Ronald Reagan in Neshoba County, Mississippi Fair.
