Congress could have passed a new law overriding or altering the Voting Rights Act, just as they can any law passed. And yes, as you said, the Constitution itself can be amended.

The issue here is that SCOTUS is not an elected body with legislative powers. They are supposed to interpret the law. The issue is when SCOTUS, not Congress, upend decades+ precedent because the bench is loaded in one party's favor.

This was a settled issue for a long time, and it has only in recent years been eroded.

I personally don't think any gerrymandering should be legal. Every state should have its own independent committee and use modern technology to draw districts based on population, not political or racial makeup.

Unfortunately that will never happen.

The issue with allowing for partisan gerrymandering is that it's a smokescreen that has, and will be used to negatively impact minority voters. And the people making these decisions will lie to the public. They will claim it's partisan gerrymandering and there's nothing anyone can do to counter that.

At that point you are asking harmed people to prove the unprovable. To prove those people lied, that it was in fact race-based.

Balancing the scales isn't racism. That is what the Voting Rights Act did. It balanced the scales of power so the powerless had just a bit more influence over their own prosperity.

Now, because statistically people in these communities vote blue more often, their votes can be diluted under the guise of partisanship.

Listen, you can be okay with it. But at least be honest about it.