Supreme Court rules in favor of Black Alabama voters in unexpected defense of Voting Rights Act

[BarryLaverty]

And slows the effort of Republicans to disenfranchise Black voters in two other states at the same time. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-rules-favor-black-142654715.html

Supreme Court rules in favor of Black Alabama voters in unexpected defense of Voting Rights Act

156

MARK SHERMAN

Thu, June 8, 2023 at 9:26 AM CDT

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a surprising 5-4 ruling in favor of Black voters in a congressional redistricting case from Alabama, with two conservative justices joining liberals in rejecting a Republican-led effort to weaken a landmark voting rights law.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined with the court's liberals in affirming a lower-court ruling that found a likely violation of the Voting Rights Act in an Alabama congressional map with one majority Black seat out of seven congressional districts in a state where more than one in four residents is Black. The state now will have to draw a new map for next year's elections.

The decision was closely watched for its potential effect on control of the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives. Because of the ruling, Republican-led legislatures in Alabama and Louisiana will have to redraw maps so that they could increase Black representation.

The outcome was unexpected in that the court had allowed the challenged Alabama map to be used for the 2022 elections — and in arguments last October the justices appeared willing to make it harder to challenge redistricting plans as racially discriminatory under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

 

The chief justice himself suggested last year that he was open to changes in the way courts weigh discrimination claims under the part of the law known as section 2. But on Thursday, Roberts wrote that the court was declining “to recast our section 2 case law as Alabama requests.”

Roberts was part of conservative high-court majorities in earlier cases that made it harder for racial minorities to use the Voting Rights Act in ideologically divided rulings in 2013 and 2021.

The other four conservative justices dissented Thursday. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the decision forces “Alabama to intentionally redraw its longstanding congressional districts so that black voters can control a number of seats roughly proportional to the black share of the State’s population. Section 2 demands no such thing, and, if it did, the Constitution would not permit it.”

The Biden administration sided with the Black voters in Alabama.

Attorney General Merrick Garland applauded the ruling: “Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race."

Evan Milligan, a Black voter and the lead plaintiff in the case, said the ruling was a victory for democracy and people of color.

"We are grateful that the Supreme Court upheld what we knew to be true: that everyone deserves to have their vote matter and their voice heard. Today is a win for democracy and freedom not just in Alabama but across the United States,” Milligan said.

The case stems from challenges to Alabama’s seven-district congressional map, which included one district in which Black voters form a large enough majority that they have the power to elect their preferred candidate. The challengers said that one district is not enough, pointing out that overall, Alabama’s population is more than 25% Black.

A three-judge court, with two appointees of former President Donald Trump, had little trouble concluding that the plan likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the votes of Black Alabamians. The panel ordered a new map drawn.

But the state quickly appealed to the Supreme Court, where five conservative justices prevented the lower-court ruling from going forward. At the same time, the court decided to hear the Alabama case.

Louisiana’s congressional map had separately been identified as probably discriminatory by a lower court. That map, too, remained in effect last year and now will have to be redrawn.

Partisan politics underlies the case, and in a closely divided House of Representatives Thursday's ruling could have a significant effect. Republicans who dominate elective office in Alabama have been resistant to creating a second district with a Democratic-leaning Black majority, or close to one, that could send another Democrat to Congress.

The judges found that Alabama concentrated Black voters in one district, while spreading them out among the others to make it much more difficult to elect more than one candidate of their choice.

Alabama’s Black population is large enough and geographically compact enough to create a second district, the judges found.

Denying discrimination, Alabama argued that the lower court ruling would have forced it to sort voters by race and insisted it was taking a “race neutral” approach to redistricting.

At arguments in October, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson scoffed at the idea that race could not be part of the equation. Jackson, the court’s first Black woman, said that constitutional amendments passed after the Civil War and the Voting Rights Act a century later were intended to do the same thing, make Black Americans “equal to white citizens.”

___

[JBizzle]

46 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

And slows the effort of Republicans to disenfranchise Black voters in two other states at the same time. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-rules-favor-black-142654715.html

Supreme Court rules in favor of Black Alabama voters in unexpected defense of Voting Rights Act

156

MARK SHERMAN

Thu, June 8, 2023 at 9:26 AM CDT

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a surprising 5-4 ruling in favor of Black voters in a congressional redistricting case from Alabama, with two conservative justices joining liberals in rejecting a Republican-led effort to weaken a landmark voting rights law.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined with the court's liberals in affirming a lower-court ruling that found a likely violation of the Voting Rights Act in an Alabama congressional map with one majority Black seat out of seven congressional districts in a state where more than one in four residents is Black. The state now will have to draw a new map for next year's elections.

The decision was closely watched for its potential effect on control of the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives. Because of the ruling, Republican-led legislatures in Alabama and Louisiana will have to redraw maps so that they could increase Black representation.

The outcome was unexpected in that the court had allowed the challenged Alabama map to be used for the 2022 elections — and in arguments last October the justices appeared willing to make it harder to challenge redistricting plans as racially discriminatory under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

 

The chief justice himself suggested last year that he was open to changes in the way courts weigh discrimination claims under the part of the law known as section 2. But on Thursday, Roberts wrote that the court was declining “to recast our section 2 case law as Alabama requests.”

Roberts was part of conservative high-court majorities in earlier cases that made it harder for racial minorities to use the Voting Rights Act in ideologically divided rulings in 2013 and 2021.

The other four conservative justices dissented Thursday. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the decision forces “Alabama to intentionally redraw its longstanding congressional districts so that black voters can control a number of seats roughly proportional to the black share of the State’s population. Section 2 demands no such thing, and, if it did, the Constitution would not permit it.”

The Biden administration sided with the Black voters in Alabama.

Attorney General Merrick Garland applauded the ruling: “Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race."

Evan Milligan, a Black voter and the lead plaintiff in the case, said the ruling was a victory for democracy and people of color.

"We are grateful that the Supreme Court upheld what we knew to be true: that everyone deserves to have their vote matter and their voice heard. Today is a win for democracy and freedom not just in Alabama but across the United States,” Milligan said.

The case stems from challenges to Alabama’s seven-district congressional map, which included one district in which Black voters form a large enough majority that they have the power to elect their preferred candidate. The challengers said that one district is not enough, pointing out that overall, Alabama’s population is more than 25% Black.

A three-judge court, with two appointees of former President Donald Trump, had little trouble concluding that the plan likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the votes of Black Alabamians. The panel ordered a new map drawn.

But the state quickly appealed to the Supreme Court, where five conservative justices prevented the lower-court ruling from going forward. At the same time, the court decided to hear the Alabama case.

Louisiana’s congressional map had separately been identified as probably discriminatory by a lower court. That map, too, remained in effect last year and now will have to be redrawn.

Partisan politics underlies the case, and in a closely divided House of Representatives Thursday's ruling could have a significant effect. Republicans who dominate elective office in Alabama have been resistant to creating a second district with a Democratic-leaning Black majority, or close to one, that could send another Democrat to Congress.

The judges found that Alabama concentrated Black voters in one district, while spreading them out among the others to make it much more difficult to elect more than one candidate of their choice.

Alabama’s Black population is large enough and geographically compact enough to create a second district, the judges found.

Denying discrimination, Alabama argued that the lower court ruling would have forced it to sort voters by race and insisted it was taking a “race neutral” approach to redistricting.

At arguments in October, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson scoffed at the idea that race could not be part of the equation. Jackson, the court’s first Black woman, said that constitutional amendments passed after the Civil War and the Voting Rights Act a century later were intended to do the same thing, make Black Americans “equal to white citizens.”

___

Why do we group voters by race?  The whole approach of "black voters" is very strange.  We don't say white people all vote the same, but we assume that all black people do???  It's very confusing.

[RETIREDFAN1]

4 minutes ago, JBizzle said:

Why do we group voters by race?

Exactly.....anyone who even sees race is a racist.......

[Monte1076]

8 minutes ago, JBizzle said:

Why do we group voters by race?  The whole approach of "black voters" is very strange.  We don't say white people all vote the same, but we assume that all black people do???  It's very confusing.

I wonder how many "black voters" aren't black anymore because they didn't vote for Biden.

[BarryLaverty]

8 minutes ago, JBizzle said:

Why do we group voters by race?  The whole approach of "black voters" is very strange.  We don't say white people all vote the same, but we assume that all black people do???  It's very confusing.

It's very confusing that you wouldn't clearly see that this was a purposeful move to take away the power of the vote of Black Americans by trying to be glib. Just baffling. 

[BarryLaverty]

Just now, Monte1076 said:

I wonder how many "black voters" aren't black anymore because they didn't vote for Biden.

Not many, because there weren't many who didn't. 

[JBizzle]

51 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

Not many, because there weren't many who didn't. 

Source?

And also, glad you admitted that they aren't black anymore...

[BarryLaverty]

2 hours ago, JBizzle said:

Source?

And also, glad you admitted that they aren't black anymore...

1. Contrary to the fears of some Democrats, Biden maintained solid support among African Americans. Biden received 92% of the Black vote, statistically indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton’s 91% in 2016. His support among Black women was never in doubt, but President Trump’s alleged appeal to Black men turned out to be illusory. (His share of the Black male vote fell from 14% in 2016 to 12% in 2020 while Biden raised the Democrats’ share from 81% to 87%.) African Americans confirmed their status as a unique group of voters for whom the contemporary Republican Party holds no discernible appeal. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/06/new-2020-voter-data-how-biden-won-how-trump-kept-the-race-close-and-what-it-tells-us-about-the-future/

[RETIREDFAN1]

3 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

1. Contrary to the fears of some Democrats, Biden maintained solid support among African Americans. Biden received 92% of the Black vote, statistically indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton’s 91% in 2016. His support among Black women was never in doubt, but President Trump’s alleged appeal to Black men turned out to be illusory. (His share of the Black male vote fell from 14% in 2016 to 12% in 2020 while Biden raised the Democrats’ share from 81% to 87%.) African Americans confirmed their status as a unique group of voters for whom the contemporary Republican Party holds no discernible appeal. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/06/new-2020-voter-data-how-biden-won-how-trump-kept-the-race-close-and-what-it-tells-us-about-the-future/

And your go to source is the globalist libnut Brookings institute.......

[BarryLaverty]

3 minutes ago, RETIREDFAN1 said:

And your go to source is the globalist libnut Brookings institute.......

I remember Kirt predicting 30% of the Black vote for Trump. Think my info is very accurate. 

[RETIREDFAN1]

2 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

I remember Kirt predicting 30% of the Black vote for Trump. Think my info is very accurate. 

You and kirt discuss it next carpool night on y'all's way to the establishment brainwashing meeting.....

[KirtFalcon]

1 hour ago, RETIREDFAN1 said:

You and kirt discuss it next carpool night on y'all's way to the establishment brainwashing meeting.....

[DaveTV1]

5 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

It's very confusing that you wouldn't clearly see that this was a purposeful move to take away the power of the vote of Black Americans by trying to be glib. Just baffling. 

It wasn't to take the power away from black voters, because they could still vote.  I do think it was an ill move by Alabama to keep a black representative out of office.  This was a good move by the Supreme Court, because it upheld the Civil Rights law so that they could have the representation and a voice in Congress.  If they happen to be a Republican that's all the better, and maybe the voters will remove the chokehold of the Democrats that desire to keep them down.  

[DaveTV1]

5 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

Not many, because there weren't many who didn't. 

I bet they regret that now.