Started By
Message
locked post

Supreme Court rejects Alabama’s congressional map with just one majority-Black district

Posted on 9/26/23 at 9:54 am
Posted by Timeoday
Easter Island
Member since Aug 2020
14547 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 9:54 am
Why do we have to draw maps to create a "black" district? What about Hispanic or Asian? With that being said, does the gerrymandered district contain any white, hispanic, or asian folks? If so, what happens to their vote?

Heck, what about districts for the poor, rich, christian, atheist, smart, stupid, ... man, etc. Why does it have to about race? How is this benefitting our country?

Why Why Why!!
Posted by Deuces
The bottom
Member since Nov 2011
15073 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:08 am to
Democrats wanted to know where their plantations are
This post was edited on 9/26/23 at 10:09 am
Posted by Tigerhalen
Member since May 2020
981 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:10 am to
The solution: on every census going forward, every one check “black.”

Some white kids have been claiming to be black or Hispanic when applying colleges.
Posted by Ribbed
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2023
2745 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to
I love the argument that it's racist not to group black people into advantageous districts by race. How do you look yourself in the mirror every day violatig the Contitution like that?
Posted by Gideon Swashbuckler
Member since Sep 2019
7667 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to
quote:

The solution: on every census going forward, every one check “black.”



Can one identify as "black", as a man
now can identify as a woman? Or a dog?
Posted by dakarx
Member since Sep 2018
7845 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to
Only 1 black district out of how many?
Posted by pjcantrelle
Galliano, LA
Member since Jul 2008
350 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:14 am to
There should be no gerrymandering. All districts should be based on parish or county sizes. Period. Full stop.
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
31966 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:20 am to
How did this ever become legal?
Posted by AUCom96
Alabama
Member since May 2020
6119 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:24 am to
Gerrymandering in itself is bullshite, but the Supremes putting a stamp on doing so on account of a specific race is a bizarre precedent that I fail to see as Consitutional. But the SC has pretty much abandoned the Constitution at their own whim.
Posted by thejuiceisloose
Member since Nov 2018
5455 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:25 am to
quote:

Heck, what about districts for the poor, rich, christian, atheist, smart, stupid, ... man, etc. Why does it have to about race? How is this benefitting our country?


Ask the Alabama legislature why they drew the maps with the intent for black voters to have as little impact as possible
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
107800 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:25 am to
Bama can draw another map. Add just one black household each time. Sooner or later, you'll hit the mark.

By then, it'll be 2026
Posted by thejuiceisloose
Member since Nov 2018
5455 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:27 am to
quote:

Bama can draw another map. Add just one black household each time. Sooner or later, you'll hit the mark.

By then, it'll be 2026


Another possibility is a court drawn map
Posted by Dday63
Member since Sep 2014
2393 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:28 am to
It's a fair question and, based on the recent school admissions case, one would hope we could reach a point where race is not an issue in creating voting districts.

For now, the Court is saying that the black population is large enough (27%), and compact enough, that failing to provide 2 majority black districts out of 7 appears discriminatory on its face.

Seems like in the near future we should be able to allow disproportionate districts as long as the State can show non discriminatory reasons for the districts. Like simple geography,maybe.
Posted by mauser
Orange Beach
Member since Nov 2008
24910 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:31 am to
Why even keep the districts contiguous? They connect 2 black areas by a long thin line and eit's stupid. Let's create 5 normal districts as if everyone was White. Now create 2 black districts called bdnorth and bdsouth and black households can vote in their bd district. The bd black rep will do what black reps do, keep the welfare coming, promote affirmative action, and blame whitey. The other geographic districts, even though peppered with black district households, will do what they normally do, represent their geographic area.
Posted by Weekend Warrior79
Member since Aug 2014
19062 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:32 am to
Looks like someone failed math class
quote:

A new map with a second majority-Black district could help Democrats in their bid to win control of the House of Representatives in next year's election, with Black people in the state more likely to vote Democratic. There are currently six Republicans and one Democrat in the state's congressional delegation.


How jacked up would the map need to e to get a 2nd district?
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
31966 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:37 am to
Congressional maps should, whenever possible, follow established borders, such as city/parish/county. In larger, denser locations, they may have to follow city council districts or other voting precincts.

Under no circumstances should congressional districts be gerrymandered, for any reason.

Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
68411 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:40 am to
You have to gerrymander congressional districts to carve out minority majority seats. You can’t abolish gerrymandering AND have mandates for so many minority majority districts. It’s just not possible. Either one is for gerrymandering or they’re against minority representation in Congress.

Louisiana should be VERY concerned by this ruling. I’m not sure how we physically can draw a map with two minority majority districts, but it will likely be required that we find a way to do so based on this ruling.
This post was edited on 9/26/23 at 10:41 am
Posted by Timeoday
Easter Island
Member since Aug 2020
14547 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:41 am to
quote:

Ask the Alabama legislature why they drew the maps with the intent for black voters to have as little impact as possible


Ask the Alabama legislature why they must draw the maps with the intent for white voters to have a lesser impact

Ask the Alabama legislature why they must draw the maps with the intent for hispanic voters to have no impact

Ask the Alabama legislature why they must draw the maps with the intent for asian voters to have no impact

LGBTQXOPEVAW crowd gonna be pissed too!!

This post was edited on 9/26/23 at 10:50 am
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
31966 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:44 am to
quote:

You have to gerrymander congressional districts to carve out minority majority seats. You can’t abolish gerrymandering AND have mandates for so many minority majority districts. It’s just not possible. Either one is for gerrymandering or they’re against minority representation in Congress.


I'm against gerrymandering for any reason. There is no legal reason to require minority majority districts. It's complete theater. There is no way that should be legal under the constitution.
Posted by N.O. via West-Cal
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2004
7556 posts
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:44 am to
While an outcome to the contrary was plausible, this is not a decision I would get too worked up about. First, the reason for no Hispanic or Asian district is that the Voting Rights Acts was designed to remedy longstanding deprivation of the ability of Black people to vote. For better or worse, we are still under that system in which race can and must be taken into account in setting districts. Interestingly, the Court has signaled that race will essentially cease to be considered. Here is the portion of the article:

"Two conservatives — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh — joined the three liberal justices in the majority in the Supreme Court ruling in June.

But the court did leave open future challenges to the law, with Kavanaugh writing in a separate opinion that his vote did not rule out challenges to Section 2 based on whether there is a time when the 1965 law’s authorization of considering race in redistricting is no longer justified."

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram