- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Supreme Court rejects Alabama’s congressional map with just one majority-Black district
Posted on 9/26/23 at 9:54 am
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!!
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:08 am to Timeoday
Democrats wanted to know where their plantations are
This post was edited on 9/26/23 at 10:09 am
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:10 am to Timeoday
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.
Some white kids have been claiming to be black or Hispanic when applying colleges.
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to Timeoday
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to Tigerhalen
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:12 am to Tigerhalen
Only 1 black district out of how many?
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:14 am to Timeoday
There should be no gerrymandering. All districts should be based on parish or county sizes. Period. Full stop.
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:20 am to Timeoday
How did this ever become legal?
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:24 am to Timeoday
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:25 am to Timeoday
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:25 am to Bjorn Cyborg
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
By then, it'll be 2026
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:27 am to udtiger
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:28 am to Timeoday
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.
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:31 am to Bjorn Cyborg
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:32 am to Timeoday
Looks like someone failed math class
How jacked up would the map need to e to get a 2nd district?

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 on 9/26/23 at 10:37 am to Timeoday
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.
Under no circumstances should congressional districts be gerrymandered, for any reason.
Posted on 9/26/23 at 10:40 am to Bjorn Cyborg
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.
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:41 am to thejuiceisloose
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:44 am to kingbob
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 on 9/26/23 at 10:44 am to Timeoday
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."
"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."
Popular
Back to top
