BATON ROUGE — After the state of Louisiana declared a prominent federal Congressional redistricting case over on Tuesday, the original plaintiffs of the case later filed a motion saying that they don’t believe the case should be dismissed yet and that there are still questions the court needs to answer.

Congressional District 6 had been at the heart of the federal case Phillips Callais et al. vs. Nancy Landry, which argued that the district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The district was dissolved with Act 2, passed last legislative session, which replaced SB8 and eliminated one of the state's two Black-majority voting districts.

Following the passage of Act 2, signed into law by Gov. Jeff Landry in May, intervenors—a third party that willingly entered the lawsuit previously—conceded to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana that the legislation had "cured" the plaintiffs' reported injury and that they had "prevailed" and "achieved complete success on all claims." Intervenors have also asked the court to vacate the case and requested payment for attorney's fees, which the state says is further evidence that the case is done.

"So this case is over," the state wrote in its initial response to the request to dismiss the case.

The state has also requested the court to dismiss the case as moot, and has also requested to vacate a permanent injunction and judgment that had been previously rendered as well as a scheduling order.

Callais’ latest filing however raises questions whether all alleged injuries from the gerrymandering have been fully addressed. Plaintiffs argue in a filing Tuesday afternoon that the district court retains jurisdiction to review Act 2, and if necessary, make its own judgment. Litigation is only paused, plaintiffs argue, because the state said election deadlines made it impossible to use any other map besides the one designed through Act 2 for this fall’s congressional election.

The plaintiffs’ filing, by attorney Edward Greim, also states they plan to file their position on the existence of continuing injury from the map by Dec. 15 and that they believe the court can make its determinations in early 2027.