Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

The Supreme Court Is On The Verge Of Killing The Voting Rights Act

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by philnotfil, Oct 4, 2022.

Page 1 of 5
  1. Oct 4, 2022 #1
    philnotfil

    philnotfil GC Hall of Fame

    17,727
    1,789
    1,718
    Apr 8, 2007
    I think we still need the Voting Rights Act. There are still people in power who work to deny access to voting rights, and so this act should remain in force.

    The Supreme Court Is On The Verge Of Killing The Voting Rights Act

    The justices’ ruling could have implications that go far beyond Alabama, potentially neutering what remains of the Voting Rights Act — a seminal piece of legislation that is ostensibly permanent yet constantly imperiled.

    The current Supreme Court justices, under Chief Justice John Roberts, might strike the final blow against the Voting Rights Act, whether it’s in this case or a future one. But they didn’t strike the first blow. According to a FiveThirtyEight analysis of Supreme Court cases involving the Voting Rights Act, most of the first 20 years of decisions interpreting the law went in a liberal direction. That changed in the late 1980s, when more right-leaning justices joined the bench and, not coincidentally, more and more of decisions overall started to go in a conservative direction. Of the seven Voting Rights Act cases that the court has heard in the Roberts era, only one had a liberal outcome. “Starting in the 1990s as the court’s composition changed, the court has been cutting back or refusing to expand Section 2 in virtually every case it’s had,” said Richard H. Pildes, a constitutional law professor at New York University.

    Now, the Roberts court could be poised to continue that trajectory by fundamentally altering the way that Section 2 operates. Up until now, the court has taken the perspective that, in order to comply with the act, states are in some situations required to take race into consideration as the primary factor in the redistricting process. Alabama Republicans are now arguing that it’s discriminatory to prioritize race over other traditional redistricting techniques, such as having compact districts, contiguous boundaries or avoiding crossing county or town boundaries. Several experts, including Pildes, told FiveThirtyEight that a ruling that sides with Alabama would be a radical departure from previous interpretations of the law and would likely free states to draw congressional or state legislative maps where minority voters have less political power relative to their numbers.


    In that sense, the outcome of this case could be very similar to a 2013 ruling in which the Roberts court gutted another section of the Voting Rights Act, freeing a group of states with histories of discrimination against minority voters to change their election laws without federal approval. In the years afterward, those states shuttered thousands of polling places, intensified their voter purges and changed voting laws in other ways that disproportionately affect minority voters.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Oct 4, 2022 #2
    swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,717
    932
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. Oct 4, 2022 #3
    wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,250
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    Really going to test the "sure there's still racism, but we've made so much progress" types
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Oct 4, 2022 #4
    G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    32,428
    12,163
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    control the court, control the country? is that what the Federalist Society has concluded? Talk about a shadow gubmnt, it would seem that they are changing laws through the USSC and just bypassing the legislative and executive branch
     
    • Agree Agree x 7
  5. Oct 4, 2022 #5
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Completely lawless and racist - been Roberts' cause for 40 years
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Oct 4, 2022 #6
    sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,576
    13,302
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    The gop has had a hard on for roe v wade, the voting rights act, affirmative action, the epa, social security and medicare, and other topics for decades. Here we are.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Oct 4, 2022 #7
    14serenoa

    14serenoa Living in Orange and surrounded by Seminoles... VIP Member

    4,820
    1,708
    2,088
    Jul 28, 2014
    Did Hitler and other Fascists' follow a similar path? Nationalism fuels racism. We are regressing as a nation.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. Oct 4, 2022 #8
    Trickster

    Trickster VIP Member

    10,111
    2,472
    3,233
    Sep 20, 2014
    I think Roberts and one other will join the liberals on this one. The decision ought to be unanimous, but knowing what kind of man Thomas is - one who sucks up to white folks - it will have at least one vote to overrule the lower court.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  9. Oct 4, 2022 #9
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Roberts is the worst of these issues. This is one of his two key issues, the other one being that elections should be for sale.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Oct 4, 2022 #10
    Trickster

    Trickster VIP Member

    10,111
    2,472
    3,233
    Sep 20, 2014
    Not sure what you a referring to with respect to Robert.

    Thomas and I are close to the same age, and we both came of age in the south. It would be insulting and disrespectful to assume because he's black, he has to vote a certain way. Nonetheless. from what I witnessed as a youth, his voting record on issues directly affecting black people is nothing short of shameful, especially as regards voting rights. I sincerely hope he proves me wrong in this particular case, but I fully expect him to vote to overrule the lower court based upon "state's rights".
     
  11. Oct 4, 2022 #11
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    I'm not defending Thomas. Far from it.

    I'm just saying that Roberts will never join the other side. He drove and authored Shelby County and he has been writing on this issue since he was in the Reagan Justice Department in the 1980s. He believes in suppressing minority voting rights with this much vigor as any member of the court, possibly more
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. Oct 4, 2022 #12
    Trickster

    Trickster VIP Member

    10,111
    2,472
    3,233
    Sep 20, 2014
    Interesting. I did not know that. But isn't this a much different issue?
     
  13. Oct 4, 2022 #13
    tilly

    tilly Superhero Mod. Fast witted. Bulletproof posts. Moderator VIP Member

    64,985
    88,243
    14,327
    May 31, 2007
    Floridian by Birth, Now in Wilmington, NC
    You still dont. You just know a message board posters interpretation of events.
     
  14. Oct 4, 2022 #14
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Feel free to look it up and give me your version and I'll be happy to respond.
     
  15. Oct 4, 2022 #15
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. Oct 4, 2022 #16
    tilly

    tilly Superhero Mod. Fast witted. Bulletproof posts. Moderator VIP Member

    64,985
    88,243
    14,327
    May 31, 2007
    Floridian by Birth, Now in Wilmington, NC
    A bit too busy to just try and justify every message board claim.

    Point is, none of us know anything based on political opinions typed on a message board.
     
  17. Oct 4, 2022 #17
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    I know that John Roberts has been trying to undermine black voting rights for over 40 years using absurd illogical and indefensible arguments, because he's really really committed to doing so.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. Oct 4, 2022 #18
    g8trdoc

    g8trdoc Premium Member

    3,595
    500
    383
    Apr 3, 2007
    Reminds me of the abortion folks. Yes we are killing babies but we have right to do so crowd is the new yes we are constructing voting maps based on racism but we need to do it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  19. Oct 4, 2022 #19
    tilly

    tilly Superhero Mod. Fast witted. Bulletproof posts. Moderator VIP Member

    64,985
    88,243
    14,327
    May 31, 2007
    Floridian by Birth, Now in Wilmington, NC
    So 3 liberal sites and two links to your own posts? Thanks for proving my point lol.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  20. Oct 4, 2022 #20
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,612
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Try looking at the facts and reasoning set forth therein. You can either disagree with the underlying facts of the conclusions derived therefrom. Or you can just stick your head in the sand.

    I'll grant Roberts one point. The structure of preclearance under the VRA did single out the South. Of course he looked like a fool when the minute the decision was issued, literally the same day, many states moved to suppress black people from voting. But it hasn't just been the South. Republicans all over the nation have been equally committed to keeping black people from voting.
     
Page 1 of 5