SCOTUS Strikes Down Part of Voting Rights Act of 1965

[Star Cluster]

“Things have changed in the South,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in that decision. “Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.”

BECAUSE of the Voting Rights Act. Which you just gutted, Roberts. Yeah, yeehaw Texas, that was a quick draw right there on ID regs. And now we can also watch the instantaneous return of the gerrymander district in 3.....2.....1.

To be fair, gerrymandering districts is not exclusive of the Republican Party.  Here is a map of North Carolina's 12th district, which stretches and meanders for around 100 miles, yet is hardly more than 10 miles wide at any point outside of Charlotte.  It was drawn out several years ago while the Dems had control of the state legislature to consist primarily of black voters as it includes large areas of black neighborhoods in Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem.  This district has only had one congressman since its inception, and that is Mel Watt of Charlotte, listed as one of the most liberal legislators in Congress.   He has not had a GOP challenger come even close to defeating him since his initial election.

Now I'm not saying that some Republicans somewhere won't try some crap now that this decision has been handed down, and the 12th may very be one of their targets.  But the Dems are just as culpable when it comes to trying to design election districts to their favor.

[Barbarella]

They're really desparate. Is there anyway this can be stopped, vetoed, overturned, etc.? Surely we can so something about this? Anybody got any silver-linings?

Not every cloud has a silver lining.

Well, anything to put a lining on that cloud? Any "look on the bright sides" or "it isn't as bad" or "we're over-reacting" or "there's still a chance we can kick them out in 2014". After all, most of the amendment is still very much in effect & the SCOTUS just made things more inconvenient.

[TheUnknown]

“Things have changed in the South,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in that decision. “Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.”

BECAUSE of the Voting Rights Act. Which you just gutted, Roberts. Yeah, yeehaw Texas, that was a quick draw right there on ID regs. And now we can also watch the instantaneous return of the gerrymander district in 3.....2.....1.

I believe the metaphor someone used in response was "like standing in a rainstorm and throwing away your umbrella because you're not getting wet."

[mellenORL]

“Things have changed in the South,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in that decision. “Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.”

BECAUSE of the Voting Rights Act. Which you just gutted, Roberts. Yeah, yeehaw Texas, that was a quick draw right there on ID regs. And now we can also watch the instantaneous return of the gerrymander district in 3.....2.....1.

To be fair, gerrymandering districts is not exclusive of the Republican Party.  Here is a map of North Carolina's 12th district, which stretches and meanders for around 100 miles, yet is hardly more than 10 miles wide at any point outside of Charlotte.  It was drawn out several years ago while the Dems had control of the state legislature to consist primarily of black voters as it includes large areas of black neighborhoods in Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem.  This district has only had one congressman since its inception, and that is Mel Watt of Charlotte, listed as one of the most liberal legislators in Congress.   He has not had a GOP challenger come even close to defeating him since his initial election.

Now I'm not saying that some Republicans somewhere won't try some crap now that this decision has been handed down, and the 12th may very be one of their targets.  But the Dems are just as culpable when it comes to trying to design election districts to their favor.

If the Dems did not do that district up, and others like it around the country, I doubt there would be more than one or two non-white reps in all of Congress. Simple tit-for-tat, "fair play", game-like approaches for voting districts is completely disingenuous. And proven completely disenfranchising, too.

On the state level, that is exactly what is going to happen to the make-up of the legislatures. Welcome back to 1959.

[Barbarella]

“Things have changed in the South,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in that decision. “Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.”

BECAUSE of the Voting Rights Act. Which you just gutted, Roberts. Yeah, yeehaw Texas, that was a quick draw right there on ID regs. And now we can also watch the instantaneous return of the gerrymander district in 3.....2.....1.

To be fair, gerrymandering districts is not exclusive of the Republican Party.  Here is a map of North Carolina's 12th district, which stretches and meanders for around 100 miles, yet is hardly more than 10 miles wide at any point outside of Charlotte.  It was drawn out several years ago while the Dems had control of the state legislature to consist primarily of black voters as it includes large areas of black neighborhoods in Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem.  This district has only had one congressman since its inception, and that is Mel Watt of Charlotte, listed as one of the most liberal legislators in Congress.   He has not had a GOP challenger come even close to defeating him since his initial election.

Now I'm not saying that some Republicans somewhere won't try some crap now that this decision has been handed down, and the 12th may very be one of their targets.  But the Dems are just as culpable when it comes to trying to design election districts to their favor.

If the Dems did not do that district up, and others like it around the country, I doubt there would be more than one or two non-white reps in all of Congress. Simple tit-for-tat, "fair play", game-like approaches for voting districts is completely disingenuous. And proven completely disenfranchising, too.

On the state level, that is exactly what is going to happen to the make-up of the legislatures. Welcome back to 1959.

Do you have anything to say to ease the sting and show that we can still vote them out in 2014?

[Radiation]

I am not feeling very optimistic about this at all. I honestly don't know that much about politics myself but this doesn't look too good for the foreseeable future.

[Barbarella]

ANYONE ELSE WITH ANYTHING POSITIVE?!

[mellenORL]

It wouldn't be so alarming if we were not in the middle of a long term, consistent polarization in politics caused in part by wealthy conservatives and religious fringe groups increasing in power.

ALEC are popping open cases of champagne as we speak.

The good news is that non-white voter registration is on par with white voter registration. Supposedly, it won't become harder or more expensive to secure a qualifying ID. And you can move, if you can afford to. Like that's any help.

[Witchyjoshy]

ANYONE ELSE WITH ANYTHING POSITIVE?!

No, Spuki, no one else has anything positive because this is a very negative situation, and it is necessary that we accept this as a negative situation.  Positive thoughts will not magically make the negative situation less negative.

The world is not filled with hippie aura rainbows.  Positive thought does not make things magically better.

Stop demanding that people share your point of view, and stop shouting at people in all caps.  Behave yourself.

[TheUnknown]

It actually kind of puzzles me that the guy's reasoning was "things are different now, no worries."  Weren't there issues prior to this past election with states trying to pass restrictive voter laws?  How does that indicate that "things have changed?"

[kefkaownsall]

He means things have changed the white man is fighting back

[Barbarella]

ANYONE ELSE WITH ANYTHING POSITIVE?!

No, Spuki, no one else has anything positive because this is a very negative situation, and it is necessary that we accept this as a negative situation.  Positive thoughts will not magically make the negative situation less negative.

The world is not filled with hippie aura rainbows.  Positive thought does not make things magically better.

Stop demanding that people share your point of view, and stop shouting at people in all caps.  Behave yourself.

Well, blacks and latinos can still vote, right? We can help them with registering, right? It's not over yet, right? We can still turn this country blue in 2014, right? We still have a say & this is just a setback & we can still get around it, right?!

As for gerrymandering, Progressives can just move to Red districts and make it moot, no biggie. The real-estate market may be crap but you don't need to OWN a home! Rent an apartment, condo or house.

I don't deny that this is a bad situation but "We're screwed" is not something to say. "We're screwed" is not going to raise morale or give us the will to fight, nor is it a good strategy to take this nation back. When segregation & Jim Crow was big, did Civil Rights leaders say "We're screwed" when the going got tough? No! Did the Sufferage Moment say "We're screwed" when the other sided doubled-down on their crackdowns? No!

I'm just disgusted with how utterly wimpy & disorganized the Left in America is, that's all.

[ironbite]

Way to not leave a legacy there Roberts.

Ironbite-you fucktard.

[Veras]

Do you have anything to say to ease the sting and show that we can still vote them out in 2014?

I'm sorry to say that I'm going to have to shoot down that hope on two counts.  First, this was the Supreme Court, which is not elected.  Second, the odds are overwhelming that Republicans will actually gain seats in the House and the Senate in 2014, not lose them.

I do feel that we might be overreacting a little bit, though.  This can hardly be considered the day that democracy died.  And this level of optimism may be brazen or foolish, but Congress might actually be able to agree to do something on this.  When it was up for renewal in 2006, it passed the House 390-33 and the Senate 98-0.  If they keep it simple and just apply it to the entire country, they might make it happen.

But probably not...

BECAUSE of the Voting Rights Act. Which you just gutted, Roberts. Yeah, yeehaw Texas, that was a quick draw right there on ID regs. And now we can also watch the instantaneous return of the gerrymander district in 3.....2.....1.

The gerrymandered district has never gone anywhere.  Republicans redrew the maps after they won in 2010, and did so seriously in their favor.  For example, Democratic House candidates beat Republican candidates 51.4% to 44.8%, but the GOP held onto a 234-201 advantage.  This is partially because even racial gerrymanders, like NC-13 and LA-1, actually benefit Republicans more than the Democrats.  By putting basically all of the Democrats in the entire state into one district, you ensure that there will be one solidly Democratic seat, but in doing so, you remove Democrats from neighboring districts, giving control there to Republicans.

However, there are other laws and precedents in effect to try to prevent egregious cases of gerrymandering.  They've repealed part of the Voting Rights Act, but the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment still stands.  Three years before the Voting Rights Act was even passed, the SCOTUS ruled in Baker v Carr that the courts could intervene in state redistricting if a state's apportionment plan denied equal protection under the law.

[Witchyjoshy]

Spuki, we?  I live in Wisconsin.  I have less than zero say in what happens in Texas.  I can only affect my own state, and I'm doing what I can as an average citizen to prevent it from going downhill.

Not everyone can or should be an activist.