Legal Insurrection;

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana’s redrawn Congressional map violated the Constitution.

“Because the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district, no compelling interest justified the State’s use of race in creating SB8, and that map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander,” wrote Justice Samuel Alito.

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does not allow “voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in one of the language minority groups identified in Section 4(f)(2) of the Act.”

In other words, the Voting Rights Act protects everyone’s right to vote. Majority, minority, Republican, Democrat, male, or female. No one gets a preference. Not a single person.

Justice Clarence Thomas;

“Today’s decision should largely put an end to this “disastrous misadventure” in voting-rights jurisprudence. As I explained more than 30 years ago, I would go further and hold that §2 of the Voting Rights Act does not regulate districting at all. The relevant text prohibits States from imposing or applying a “voting qualification,” “prerequisite to voting,” or “standard, practice, or procedure,” in a manner that results in a denial or abridgement of the right to vote based on race. 52 U. S. C. §10301(a). How States draw district lines does not fall within any of those three categories. The words in §2 instead “reach only ‘enactments that regulate citizens’ access to the ballot or the processes for counting a ballot’; they ‘do not include a State’s . . . choice of one districting scheme over another.’” Therefore, no §2 challenge to districting should ever succeed.”

Democrats big mad.

Tim Pool explains in plain language.