54

Republican state officials are advancing new legal arguments in the courts that threaten to erode the Voting Rights Act's protections against racial discrimination in the election process.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


In ongoing redistricting lawsuits mainly across the South, Republican state officials have been raising novel arguments that threaten to erode a key set of protections against racial discrimination in the election process.

Three additional legal arguments have emerged, however, that could put Section 2 protections at risk — and some of the Supreme Court's conservative justices have already shown interest in these positions.

More than a dozen Republican state attorneys general — from Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia — have lined up in support of the argument against a private right of action with a friend-of-the-court brief.

Though the Supreme Court rejected Alabama's attempt to severely limit how race can be used when redrawing voting maps, the state's Republican officials have signaled they're gearing up for another challenge against race-based redistricting.

And in a recent court filing, GOP officials said they believe evidence gathering is needed on whether it's still constitutional for Congress to allow redistricting based on race under Section 2.

They claim that just as federal courts have effectively put an end to race-conscious admissions programs at colleges and universities, they should also stop allowing political map drawing based on race.


The original article contains 1,137 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 82%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
54 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2170 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS