Supreme Court Strikes Down Voting Rights Act Provisions
The Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering is not subject to review in federal courts. The ruling may also affect the structural rights of political parties in Congress. The ruling could have widespread implications ahead of the midterm elections. Critics argue the decision weakens a key provision of the law. The ruling may also impact state legislative lines and county lines. State lawmakers may now have the opportunity to redraw their own districts or local city and municipal districts. The decision follows the weakening of the Voting Rights Act. Republican Governor Jeff Landry stated the state is prohibited from holding elections until the current US House districts are addressed. Early voting was scheduled to begin this Saturday ahead of the May 16th primaries. The ruling centers on the legality of race considerations during the redistricting process.
Topics
Developing
- 863d Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore.
- 863d Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
- 863d Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est.
- 863d Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium.
Sources · 7 independent
“Partisan gerrymandering, the Supreme Court said in another case, is not subject to review in the federal courts. And this means that, as a practical matter...”
“The second one in 2021, minority voters have the power to elect the candidates they want are now in peril across the country. This court, the conservative majority on this court, is uniformly hostile to government decision making that takes a kind of race.”
“because of the Supreme Court ruling, the Voting Rights Act's protection of minority election districts across the country has been deeply weakened.”
“yesterday's Supreme Court ruling striking down parts of the Voting Rights Act could have widespread voting implications before the midterms. The High Court voided Louisiana's map that included a second majority Black congressional district.”
“The High Court voided Louisiana's map that included a second majority Black congressional district. The case was centered around how much race can be considered when lawmakers redraw districts.”
“controlled legislature, which of course draws the political maps, is seeing this ruling as a rationale to move very quickly before this year's congressional midterms to make the state more Republican friendly for congressional races.”
“so long as no one is explicitly saying these new maps are intended to discriminate against minorities, this gerrymandering will be perfectly legal.”
“as long as no one is explicitly saying these new maps are intended to discriminate against minorities, this gerrymandering will be perfectly legal.”
“So Let's talk about how we expect Democrats. encounter what may be polling to respond to this because Democrats have become very aggressive and pretty nimble at Countering Republican gerrymandering in places like California and now Virginia.”
“to a outcome of today's decision is that gerrymanders, but given today's ruling and the aggressively hyper-parse nature of these battles over maps, they could go even further.”
“Yesterday's Supreme Court ruling in a case involving Louisiana's congressional map could have widespread implications before the midterms.”
Unlock the full story
Get a Pro subscription or above to see the live story progression and the full list of independent sources confirming each event as they happen.
Log in to upgrade