Supreme Court rules in favor of Black Alabama voters

"Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh aligned 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 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."
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-...ghts-alabama-af0d789ec7498625d344c0a4327367fe

The Supreme Court's reasoning was that about 1 out of 4 congressional districts in Alabama should be majority black since about 1 out of 4 voters there are black. That way blacks can elect the number of candidates that is proportional to their percentage of the population and not have their political power diluted by whites. So is voting a group right as well as an individual right?

 

What about Senate races? No states are majority black.

 

So, is the SC saying they think black people only vote for black people? I don't vote for white people based on their being white... I vote based on protecting the right to bear arms, mostly.

 

I would have thought drawing Congressional districts based on race would violate the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.

 

The SCOTUS does not legislate. So all Biden needs to do to be on safe turf with the Republicans, is convene a committee of constitutional scholars like Lawrence Tribe, and have them decide whether the SCOTUS decision was constitutional or not. Same with the 2nd Amendment. And if their decision is that the SCOTUS decision was not a valid constitutional decision, Biden can then just simply declare that we are not going to follow the decision. The Republicans in Alabama recently did that. - Alabama Republican’s redistricting proposal an insult to the Supreme Court, Black lawmakers say

In this case it was just a flat out refusal to do as the court said.


The only actual problem in this case is that Biden lacks a spine.

 

Since it is the State which, in your scenario, would be drawing the Congressional lines, your suggestion would be as ineffectual, as it is ridiculous. So, you advocate that everyone should now shop out, for opinions about the Constitutionality of Court decisions? LOL-- very practical. While I would very much like to do something about this contrived Court, having all of government pretend that they don't exist, I don't think will cut it, and could well have dire, long-term consequences.

As to the state of this governmental conflict: if Alabama's maps do not measure up to snuff, against the earlier SCOTUS order, the Supreme Court has the power to just appoint someone, to make the change, required by the Court. As nervy as this move by the Alabama legislature sounds, the article I just read, gives me the impression that Alabama Republicans were just trying to do the absolute minimum possible, that would be allowed to slide through. Instead of two, black majority districts, or something "quite close to it," Alabama's Republican legislators only got the second, as close as 40% black. I would expect that they will just keep inching closer to 50%, but keeping a white majority, for as long as the SCOTUS indulges their disrespect for the Court, and their transparent, partisan willingness to defy the law, and to cheat, if it gets them another seat in Congress.

It is really not an exaggeration, to say that today's top, GOP priority, is the accruing of more power, to itself.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...al-district-in-defiance-of-supreme-court.html

 

The SCOTUS cam be ignored.

 

So Democrats are going to start ignoring court orders that they don't like?

Interesting times ahead.

 

The President and others have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. If the SCOTUS is straying from established Constitutional interpretations they must be ignored. And if SCOTUS reverses a previous long-held ruling, it’s a sign of arbitrariness by the SCOTUS. Checks and balances my friend. It is wrong to assume that the SCOTUS is infallible. Remember that the Constitution says SC justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior”. So bad behavior is a given possibility. And checks and balances are required. Hence, if Biden fails to rein in the SCOTUS and correct these errors, he is in violation of his oath and is guilty of dereliction of duty.

 

Hilarious! Thanks for the precedent.

 

So now facts are funny to the righties. Who knew?

 

That only tells me that you not only don't know what a fact is, you don't know what a precedent is either.

 

I agree.... We should just ignore any infringements to the second amendment

 

Can someone explain to me why placing blacks into their black majority district or two enhances their voting power. Seems to me that would be diluting the black vote, at least on a statewide level. I must be missing something here. Here in Georgia the federal courts made our state legislature redraw our district lines also in 2000 and 2010 due to not having enough majority black districts.


We have 5 majority black districts, 5 black democratic congressmen, Georgia has around 35% black population statewide. The 5 black districts come out to be exactly 35% of our congressional delegation with the other 9 being white Republicans. The federal courts left us alone this time.

 

No, it doesn’t tell you anything. But it tells me that you lack respect for the Constitution.

 

Sez the guy who wants to ignore Supreme Court decisions he doesn't like.

I gotta say, you've been entertaining today!

 

That by itself is not a valid reason to redraw the map.

In fact, if you were to try to guarantee that the number of districts that had black majorities were proportionally equal to the percentage of the black population, it would clearly require intentional gerrymandering, and I suspect would likely require some very strangely shaped districts on the map, to try to accommodate that outcome.

This is clearly faulty and illogical reasoning.

I doubt that was what the Supreme Court's real reasoning was in this case, although it could have been part of the emotional driver in the decision.

If both the black and white population were dispersed and equally distributed across the state, it would be mathematically impossible to set up boundaries that would allow blacks to have any majority districts.

As insane as this may sound, it would actually be more reasonable to just create a separate set of congressional districts in the state for voters who are black, than the reasoning behind the idea you seem to be supporting.

According to your reasoning, wouldn't it be true that white voters who find themselves within the boundary lines of majority black districts would be "disenfranchised"?

Indeed, and this demonstrates how absurd this whole concept is.

 

See, this is the problem with the right and why the left is impatient with the right. NO CURIOSITY. No investigation into different ideas. A preference for point-scoring and intolerance versus logic, facts, and critical thinking. Goodbye.

 

you feel that way about the FDR court-a court that ignored precedent more than any other in history? Biden's a piece of bovine excrement. He's not able to determine if the Court has acted improperly

 

So since you think it's okay to ignore the supreme Court when they go against what you perceive as the Constitution..... Should we also ignore all the laws that are infringements to the second amendment?

 

Ignoring the Supreme Court isn't a particularly original idea. I'm thinking you won't like the precedent it sets. But if you ever do bring logic, facts, and critical thinking to a discussion on this forum it would be a big day. I patiently await that day's arrival.

Catch ya later!

 

I specified a need to convene a committee of constitutional scholars to discuss an issue regarding the relevance to the Constitution. What requirements did YOU specify?

 

We already have such a committee and it's called the supreme Court

 

And you’re the kind of guy who would station a fox to guard the henhouse.

 

I'm not the topic, focus on it.

Just because they make decisions you don't like or agree with doesn't mean you get to dictate some further bureaucratic level.